Posted by Alex Kuznetsov on 07/31/07 17:20

On Jul 31, 9:00 am, --CELKO-- <jcelko...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> No; it would much more likely mean that he wants to pass a set of values to his function. <<
>
> Not very likely at all. Read the last 5+ years of postings here and
> you will see that when they want to pass a list to an IN() predicate,
> they explicitly ask about that. When they want to pass a table they
> explicitly ask about that, as this guy did.
>
> >> the ability to simply pass a set would make things enormously easier, faster, and cleaner - which is probably why they're including it in SQL 2008. <<
>
> Right now you can declare a huge number of parameters in a stored
> procedure -- more than enough for any practical situation. But
> programmers who grew up with BASIC and other interpreted languages
> seem to panic at the the thought of a long parameter list.
>

Procedures with long lists of parameters simply cannot be fully tested
in reasonable time. Just think how many permutations are there for
1000 nullable parameters. Any responsible professional will avoid
using untested code in real life...

[Back to original message]