Developer 2000: Why use Object ID instead of Object Name?
From: John Haskins <76054.334_at_compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:47:44 -0800
Message-ID: <75a9e9$r2v$1_at_news-2.news.gte.net>
[Quoted] [Quoted] I'm working with Developer's built-ins and noticing that many of them accept [Quoted] [Quoted] either an object name or an object ID as input. Why go to the extra trouble [Quoted] to create a variable to store the object ID, extract the object's ID with [Quoted] FIND_objectname, and then use it? Since you have to know the object's name [Quoted] to get the ID anyway, it seems it's easier to just use the name and be done with it.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:47:44 -0800
Message-ID: <75a9e9$r2v$1_at_news-2.news.gte.net>
[Quoted] [Quoted] I'm working with Developer's built-ins and noticing that many of them accept [Quoted] [Quoted] either an object name or an object ID as input. Why go to the extra trouble [Quoted] to create a variable to store the object ID, extract the object's ID with [Quoted] FIND_objectname, and then use it? Since you have to know the object's name [Quoted] to get the ID anyway, it seems it's easier to just use the name and be done with it.
[Quoted] Opinions on this are welcome...I'm sure there's some reason Oracle went to the trouble to make this feature available. Received on Thu Dec 17 1998 - 07:47:44 CET