Re: [gnome-db] gda_firebird_recordset_describe_column is working ?

Rodrigo Moya wrote:

On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 10:45 +0000, Jeronimo Albi wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:

On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 13:30 +0000, Jeronimo Albi wrote:

I noticed that the following Changelog entry is missing in CVS head,

      * providers/firebird/gda-firebird-recordset.c:
        (gda_firebird_recordset_describe_column): Is working now.

I'd like to now if entry is missing because somehing related to an assert raised using gnome-database-properties (in my case), after connection with database.

       ** (gnome-database-properties:1940): CRITICAL **:
       file gda-data-model.c: line 467 (gda_data_model_describe_column):
       assertion `CLASS (model)->describe_column != NULL' failed

I successfully tested gda_data_model_describe_column() with Firebird
provider. But I could not find why assert was reised in gnome-database-properties.

this seems to be a provider not implementing that method.

In gda-firebird-recordset.c describe function :

 static GdaFieldAttributes *
 gda_firebird_recordset_describe_column (GdaDataModel *model, gint col)

is implemented and works fine for me. And in class init is assigned like this:

 static void
 gda_firebird_recordset_class_init (GdaFirebirdRecordsetClass *klass)
       GObjectClass *object_class = G_OBJECT_CLASS (klass);
       GdaDataModelClass *model_class = GDA_DATA_MODEL_CLASS (klass);
       parent_class = g_type_class_peek_parent (klass);
       object_class->finalize = gda_firebird_recordset_finalize;
       model_class->get_n_rows = gda_firebird_recordset_get_n_rows;
       model_class->get_n_columns = gda_firebird_recordset_get_n_columns;
model_class->describe_column = gda_firebird_recordset_describe_column;

Am i missing something ?

I mean those warnings come from a provider not implementing that, probably other
than the Firebird one. If you're sure it's gda-firebird, then maybe you
are using somewhere one of the GdaDataModel-based classes that don't
have the describe_column method?
Yes i might be another provider, i hadn't thought about that.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]