[DB-SIG] Controlling return types, again

[Dieter Maurer]

Art Protin wrote at 2007-5-22 09:22 -0400:
> ...
>In my opinion (which is never as humble as it should be), "qmark" is 
>barely adequate;
>numeric should be the required minimum.  But now that so many have 
>gotten used
>to "qmark", it will probably never go away.

If we speak about readability and safety, "%(name)s" combined
with a dictionary is far better than "numeric" or "qmark".

SQL statements can get quite a lot of parameters and readability is
therefore valuable...



-- 
Dieter