tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post8349495462174547564..comments2023-06-18T16:15:22.432+01:00Comments on PL/SQL Challenge: Questions regarding DELETE from the 19 October quiz (1522)Steven Feuersteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16619706770920320550noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-79174528996627549172010-10-25T08:12:32.968+01:002010-10-25T08:12:32.968+01:00H-m-m, yes. But it says "if both m and n exis...H-m-m, yes. But it says "if both m and n exist", not "if both ELEMENTS WITH indexes m and n exist".<br />Former likely to be interpreted "if both m and n are not null". So this is the most likely a pure editorial change - while bad one.<br /><br />BTW, it is present in 11.2 only - in 11.1 it is in the old way.al0https://www.blogger.com/profile/15743792964167204705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-48991722355827827292010-10-21T11:49:59.861+01:002010-10-21T11:49:59.861+01:00He read it in 11g Doc http://download.oracle.com/d...He read it in 11g Doc http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e17126/composites.htm#CJAFGFIG<br />Behaviour of DELETE doesn't changed. But 11g documentation states something strange.Vitaliy Lyanchevskiyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03394959689295703518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-69141640156043999542010-10-21T09:36:18.145+01:002010-10-21T09:36:18.145+01:00Hi Steve,
just from curiosity - does that player ...Hi Steve,<br /><br />just from curiosity - does that player pointed to the exact place in the documentation that supports his point of view?<br /><br />Regards,<br />Oleksandral0https://www.blogger.com/profile/15743792964167204705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-84111770800260455532010-10-21T09:00:52.872+01:002010-10-21T09:00:52.872+01:00The way I read "If m and n exist" was &q...The way I read "If m and n exist" was "if you have specified values for m and n". I hadn't considered that it was an ambiguous wording until reading this blog entry!Boneisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12879435303399136559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-22157150328633571762010-10-21T08:14:49.733+01:002010-10-21T08:14:49.733+01:00I'd hazard the guess, that Oracle fixed a &quo...I'd hazard the guess, that Oracle fixed a "doc bug"?<br /><br />Player quotes documentation:<br /><br />"DELETE(m,n) deletes all elements whose subscripts are in the range m..n, if both m and n exist and m <= n; otherwise, it does nothing."<br /><br />Steven quotes documentation:<br /><br />"DELETE(m,n) removes all elements in the range m..n from an associative array or nested table. If m is larger than n or if m or n is null, DELETE(m,n) does nothing."<br /><br />They seem to have changed the wording "m and n exist" to a wording about whether m and n is null. Probably the original documentation writer meant to say "is not null" when he wrote "exist" :-)Kim Berg Hansenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06491635470794828550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-56754207551343108072010-10-21T07:25:53.570+01:002010-10-21T07:25:53.570+01:00Doesn't delete(n) remove the element with subs...Doesn't delete(n) remove the element with subscript n rather than the nth element?Piethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16038735462554268232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-22465427694700780972010-10-21T07:19:35.120+01:002010-10-21T07:19:35.120+01:00Doesn't delete(n) remove the element with subs...Doesn't delete(n) remove the element with subscript n rather than the nth element?Piethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16038735462554268232noreply@blogger.com