DDevelopment & Design

DATE or NUMBER as a column name

One could expect that if it is possible to name a table’s column “DATE” then it is safe to do so. It appears, however, that using such a column’s name would cause the following compilation error in any procedure using an input parameter of the row type based on this table: ORA-06552: PL/SQL: Compilation unit analysis terminated ORA-06553: PLS-320: the declaration of the type of this expression is incomplete or malformed Surprisingly, view on this table works correctly and you can insert data through it. It seems that only PL/SQL has this error. The same errors occurs when the column is named NUMBER. However there is no problem with names: VARCHAR, VARCHAR2, INTEGER, FLOAT, TIMESTAMP, CLOB, LOB, CHAR, LONG Here is the test for DATE name

create table test_date ( "DATE" date );
create table test_date2 ( "DATE2" date );

-- this procedure would not compile
create procedure pr_test_date(p_date test_date%rowtype) as
begin
 null;
end;

create procedure pr_test_date2(p_date2 test_date2%rowtype) as
begin
 null;
end;

create view v_test_date as select * from test_date;
create view v_test_date2 as select * from test_date2;

insert into v_test_date("DATE") values (sysdate);

— Previous article

DATE lub NUMBER jako nazwa kolumny

Next article —

TouK on WGK 2011

You May Also Like
DDevelopment & Design

How we use Kotlin with Exposed at TouK

Why Kotlin? At TouK, we try to early adopt technologies. We don’t have a starter project skeleton that is reused in every new project, we want to try something that fits the project needs, even if it’s not that popular yet. We tried Kotlin first it mid 2016, right after reaching 1.0.2 version
DDevelopment & Design

Private fields and methods are not private in groovy

I used to code in Java before I met groovy. Like most of you, groovy attracted me with many enhancements. This was to my surprise to discover that method visibility in groovy is handled different than Java!

Consider this example:

class Person {
private String name
public  String surname

private Person() {}

private String signature() { "${name?.substring(0, 1)}. $surname" }

public String toString() { "I am $name $surname" }
}

How is this class interpreted with Java?

  1. Person has private constructor that cannot be accessed
  2. Field "name" is private and cannot be accessed
  3. Method signature() is private and cannot be accessed

Let's see how groovy interpretes Person:

public static void main(String[] args) {
def person = new Person()   // constructor is private - compilation error in Java
println(person.toString())

    person.@name = 'Mike'       // access name field directly - compilation error in Java
println(person.toString())

    person.name = 'John'        // there is a setter generated by groovy
println(person.toString())

    person.@surname = 'Foo'     // access surname field directly
println(person.toString())

    person.surname = 'Bar'      // access auto-generated setter
println(person.toString())

println(person.signature()) // call private method - compilation error in Java
}

I was really astonished by its output:

I am null null
I am Mike null
I am John null
I am John Foo
I am John Bar
J. Bar

As you can see, groovy does not follow visibility directives at all! It treats them as non-existing. Code compiles and executes fine. It's contrary to Java. In Java this code has several errors, pointed out in comments.

I've searched a bit on this topic and it seems that this behaviour is known since version 1.1 and there is a bug report on that: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GROOVY-1875. It is not resolved even with groovy 2 release. As Tim Yates mentioned in this Stackoverflow question: "It's not clear if it is a bug or by design". Groovy treats visibility keywords as a hint for a programmer.

I need to keep that lesson in mind next time I want to make some field or method private!