IRC Logs

Network: freenode Channel: #csharp

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.irclog.org

[16:26]<lyfuym-wjzc>so I wanted to group them
[16:27]<zndy_wjfnz>ah okay. I speak almost your language though ;)
[16:28]<rjjgwq>Morning
[16:31]<afd>morning!
[16:31]<lyfuym-wjzc>evening
[16:38]<rjjgwq>evening!
[16:42]<-- sgvgzs xzs fuyv (>/dev/brain")
[16:46]<krffnjs>INSERT INTO Verhaltensmatrix (TradetailID, User, Gebot, Uhrzeit) VALUES (2699, 'kalleos9', 50, '2006-05-26 15:22:37')
[16:46]<krffnjs>i get a syntax error
[16:46]<krffnjs>you find any suspicious?
[16:46]<krffnjs>+things
[16:46]<zndy_wjfnz>Kalleos: paste the error (the last part)
[16:47]<krffnjs>What part of "syntax error" do you want to have?
[16:47]<zndy_wjfnz>the part that starts with: NEAR and a quote from your query
[16:48]<krffnjs>i cant find anything like that
[16:48]<zndy_wjfnz>then the whole error. It's a SQL error, right?
[16:48]<krffnjs>unfortunately im using an acces-db
[16:48]<krffnjs>yes it is
[16:49]<drdyrrr_>don't build sql strings
[16:50]<drdyrrr_>create a command object and put;
[16:50]<drdyrrr_>10 01INSERT INTO Verhaltensmatrix (TradetailID, User, Gebot, Uhrzeit) VALUES (?,?,?,?)
[16:50]<drdyrrr_>and then do .addparameter and give it the native types
[16:50]<krffnjs>...
[16:50]<drdyrrr_>let it worry about how to get a date/time to the sql server - thats what it's there for.
[16:51]<krffnjs>anyone have got an idea where the syntax error could be?
[16:51]<drdyrrr_>your date/time
[16:51]<zndy_wjfnz>damieng_: Does Access support Stored Procedures?
[16:51]<drdyrrr_>Remi, thats not a stored procedure.
[16:51]<drdyrrr_>it's a parameterised query.
[16:51]<drdyrrr_>which has been supported since odbc days.
[16:51]<rjjgwq>prepared statement ?
[16:51]<krffnjs>i just showed you what the sql is
[16:52]<krffnjs>not how i created it
[16:52]<drdyrrr_>the sql is wrong. dates are not strings.
[16:52]<zndy_wjfnz>I don't see why you shouldn't use normal queries, but I don't have time for a discussion. I'm off :)
[16:52]<krffnjs>but this one works: INSERT INTO Transaktionsdetails (ArtikelDatenID, Verkaufspreis, VKDatum, EbayNr, Gebote, Besucher, Beobachter) VALUES (12, 50, '2006-05-26 15:22:37', '110000170335', 0, 0, 0)
[16:52]<rjjgwq>Is the data type a datetime in both tables ?
[16:52]<krffnjs>topic injection - i know
[16:53]<krffnjs>yes..
[16:53]<drdyrrr_>then paste the first one, the wrong one, into microsoft access and try running it against your db. see what it complains about.
[16:53]<krffnjs>i'll check one again
[16:53]<zndy_wjfnz|afk>Kalleos: It says Gebot as fieldname in the first query, and Gebote in the second
[16:54]<krffnjs>well, if i name the columns wrong access will tell it me
[16:55]<krffnjs>both field types are the same date type!
[17:10]<krffnjs>GUYS
[17:10]<krffnjs>the solution was:
[17:10]<krffnjs>User is a reserved name :(
[17:11]<mjzymygo>kalleos: you querying sql-server?
[17:11]<krffnjs>an accessdb via oledb
[17:12]<mjzymygo>poor you
[17:12]<mjzymygo>try '[User]'
[17:13]<mjzymygo>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;286335
[17:14]<krffnjs>fuckin error engine
[17:14]<krffnjs>it should tell me that it is a reserved name
[17:14]<krffnjs>and not "syntax error"
[17:15]<mjzymygo>what was the exact error?
[17:16]<dgrrdrg69>if my 2.0 app uses a 1.1 dll will the end user need a framework for both 1.1 and 2.0?
[17:17]<mjzymygo>and what does the InfoMessage event report?
[17:17]<lcs>megaman74: possibly yes
[17:17]<mjzymygo>MegaMan.. yes
[17:17]<dgrrdrg69>somebody else said no
[17:18]<mjzymygo>the CLR's bytcodes and expectations are different at JIT time
[17:18]<mjzymygo>they lied.
[17:18]<dgrrdrg69>why wouldnt it be backwards compatible?
[17:19]<mjzymygo>because .NET 2.0 is quite a radicle overhaul and under certain circumstances will die quite dramatically because area's of the frameworks differ
[17:19]<dgrrdrg69>hm
[17:19]<mjzymygo>You will need to get the original source and upgrade the source to .NET 2 if you want to avoid 1.1
[17:20]<dgrrdrg69>is there a way to convert 1.1 dll to 2.0 without its source?
[17:20]<mjzymygo>So it isn't backwards compatible.
[17:20]<dgrrdrg69>gah
[17:20]<mjzymygo>besides, 1.1 is a standard part of XP these days
[17:20]<dgrrdrg69>that does not please me
[17:20]<mjzymygo>why?
[17:20]<dgrrdrg69>Moridin8 you'd be surprised how many machines dont even have 1.1
[17:20]<mjzymygo>No I wouldn't... I have dealt with governmental IT departments.
[17:20]<dgrrdrg69>there just are not any mainstream apps using .net to distribute the framework to even a majority
[17:21]<mjzymygo>just ensure the framework is installed at install time using installshield
[17:21]<dgrrdrg69>maybe if MS actually used their .net in their apps
[17:21]<mjzymygo>they do
[17:21]<dgrrdrg69>yeah yeah but that takes long time
[17:21]<dgrrdrg69>what apps?
[17:21]<mjzymygo>what?
[17:21]<mjzymygo>everything new
[17:21]<mjzymygo>Sql Management Studio
[17:21]<mjzymygo>Visual Studio 2002/2003/2005
[17:21]<mjzymygo>The new office product
[17:21]<mjzymygo>Biztalk
[17:21]<mjzymygo>Commerce server
[17:21]<mjzymygo>and on
[17:21]<dgrrdrg69>lol the average joe doesnt have that dude, im talking about like office
[17:21]<mjzymygo>and on
[17:22]<mjzymygo>ATI do as well
[17:22]<mjzymygo>as does NVidia
[17:22]<mjzymygo>Sage
[17:22]<mjzymygo>(accounts)
[17:22]<dgrrdrg69>new office no one will be able to afford or handle on their comp, especially if it was built for vista
[17:22]<mjzymygo>the .NET redistributable is fine as part of the install package
[17:23]<dgrrdrg69>meh
[17:23]<mjzymygo>megaman... it will be compatible with 2000/XP/2003
[17:23]<mjzymygo>your misinformed

Back to #csharp
Or go to some related logs:
#gentoo
#cisco
#debian
#gentoo
#gentoo