Christian wrote:
>> Why the hell not?
>> What can I do?
> You will not get more answers by using those kind of words here.
I don't think they'll get fewer, either.

Signature
Lew
H.L schrieb:
>> Hello
>>
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> dynamically. The toString method might yield a bad value. You did not
> indicate that to us.
tth object is a hashvalue with lentgth 192 bits.
toString() returns a base-32 representation of this hashvalue.
All values are checked.. they contain normal values.
> Your SQL statement is really extremely complex. If the error can't be
> solved, I would break it down and do it one part at a time. Use your
> program to branch based on the results of each query. You will have to
> add some code, but you may save some time in the end. You don't even
> have to use prepared statements.
I thought of the prepared statement as easiest method for escaping SQL
syntax in my strings .. that was the onlyth reason for choosing it.
Also I used such a complex statement because my reasoning was that one
statement would be faster that waiting for the result of a statement and
then executing the next one. May be bad reasoning. Still it has the
benefit of being atomic to the program.
> You will not get more answers by using those kind of words here.
I will try to swear less. Please believe me that I meant not to harm
anyone with my harsh words expressing the frustration resulting of my
own incompetence.
Lew - 01 Dec 2007 16:57 GMT
> Also I used such a complex statement because my reasoning was that one
> statement would be faster that waiting for the result of a statement and
> then executing the next one. May be bad reasoning. Still it has the
> benefit of being atomic to the program.
It may have the detriment of not being a legitimate SQL statement.
>> You will not get more answers by using those kind of words here.
>
> I will try to swear less. Please believe me that I meant not to harm
> anyone with my harsh words expressing the frustration resulting of my
> own incompetence.
I wouldn't get all nervous because some guy can't stand the hell of a
programmer's frustration. I think most of us get it, and if you have to spout
off a little, you go ahead and get those hellacious feelings out of your
system. We've all been little hellions our own selves, I think, but we're not
all about to drink hellsbane potions over it.
Your language was perfectly fine and no one should have given you trouble over
it. Certainly it was nothing to raise hell over.

Signature
Lew
H.L - 01 Dec 2007 17:21 GMT
> I wouldn't get all nervous because some guy can't stand the hell of a
> programmer's frustration. I think most of us get it, and if you have to spout
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> --
> Lew
I didn't mean to give him trouble about his comment. Nor did I "raise
hell". I merely pointed out that it is a public newsgroup with civil
language. Many other otherwise respectable newsgroups have extreme
amounts of obscene language. I think that your comment about me is way
off line. Note that I wrote one short sentence about this after having
spent two full paragraphs trying to help with the original problem. My
comment was perfectly legit.
Lew - 01 Dec 2007 19:00 GMT
> I didn't mean to give him trouble about his comment. Nor did I "raise
> hell". I merely pointed out that it is a public newsgroup with civil
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> spent two full paragraphs trying to help with the original problem. My
> comment was perfectly legit.
I agree completely, your comment was perfectly legit. I recall making no
comment about you. I spoke only generally, and certainly did not want to
point any arrows at any one person. I just wanted the OP to feel comfortable
about making their own comment, also one that was perfectly legit.
If you choose to take offense, please note that it is your choice, and that I
offer none to you.

Signature
Lew