September 27, 2010 at 3:20 am
tommyh (9/27/2010)
da-zero (9/27/2010)
Good question, although I seem to remember that I've seen similar ones.But I don't think that considering scientific notation as numeric is stupid. 2e1 is just another way writing 20, so it is still a number.
I think the reason why you can't immediately convert it to an int is because of how SQL Server handles the scientific notation. But I can't seem to find any references on that.
And how exactly do you know that '2e1' is a "scientific notation"? Could be there by accident so the value should actually have been 21 (blackjack anyone?). Now that error just slipped us by because SQL "tries" to think.
The aim of ISNUMERIC is not to prevent erroneous data. It could never do that - the way the keys are arranged, "231" is a much more probable type than "2e1" if you want to enter 21.
ISNUMERIC is intended to prevent run-time errors when converting data from an untrusted source to a numeric data type. It fails miserably at that goal, obviously - but if you're going to bash a function,. then at least use the proper arguments.
September 27, 2010 at 3:36 am
tommyh (9/27/2010)
And yes i dont think $1 should count as numeric. $ is a currency symbol not a number.
+ / * - % are arithmetic operators, not numbers. So 1+1 should still be rejected in your opinion. What you are looking for is a function that tests if a given expression matches the pattern '[0-9]' for every character. That is not what isnumeric() is intended for (as Hugo already mentioned). It is similar to complaining that a hammer cannot tighten a screw.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
September 27, 2010 at 3:42 am
Hugo Kornelis (9/27/2010)
tommyh (9/27/2010)
da-zero (9/27/2010)
Good question, although I seem to remember that I've seen similar ones.But I don't think that considering scientific notation as numeric is stupid. 2e1 is just another way writing 20, so it is still a number.
I think the reason why you can't immediately convert it to an int is because of how SQL Server handles the scientific notation. But I can't seem to find any references on that.
And how exactly do you know that '2e1' is a "scientific notation"? Could be there by accident so the value should actually have been 21 (blackjack anyone?). Now that error just slipped us by because SQL "tries" to think.
The aim of ISNUMERIC is not to prevent erroneous data. It could never do that - the way the keys are arranged, "231" is a much more probable type than "2e1" if you want to enter 21.
ISNUMERIC is intended to prevent run-time errors when converting data from an untrusted source to a numeric data type. It fails miserably at that goal, obviously - but if you're going to bash a function,. then at least use the proper arguments.
I dont agree with your arguments either. A string is either a number or its not. Not depending on what you try and convert it to. It should be one or the other.
So you think it sucks for your reasons and i think it sucks for my reasons. Who is right... i am off course 😉
/T
September 27, 2010 at 3:42 am
da-zero (9/27/2010)
tommyh (9/27/2010)
And yes i dont think $1 should count as numeric. $ is a currency symbol not a number.+ / * - % are arithmetic operators, not numbers. So 1+1 should still be rejected in your opinion.
It is. ISNUMERIC('1+1') returns 0. And that makes sense, because '1+1' does not convert to any of the numerical data types. A + (or -) is only permitted before the first number character. (Actually, the rule is a bit more complex than that). You can convert '+123' or '-123' to numeric, but not '12+3' or '12-3'.
September 27, 2010 at 4:05 am
tommyh (9/27/2010)
I dont agree with your arguments either. A string is either a number or its not. Not depending on what you try and convert it to. It should be one or the other.
If that's your point of view, then you should be happy with the current implementation of ISNUMERIC. "2e1" is a valid number.
I already said that all programming languages I have worked with recognise 1e2 as a floating point representation for 20 (1 x 102). I had at that time not yet verified your assertion that ".NET doesnt do this. Old VB6 does...". I have now. Using Visual Studio 2005, I opened a VB.Net project, edited a line to include the numeric constant "1e3", and I Visual Studio automatically changed it to "1000.0". I then tried the same with "1.23e-15", and VisualStudio changed that to "1.23E-15". Both versions could be compiled and executed.
I then tried the same with a C# project. This time, the code was not changed, but it still compiled and executed without problems.
So, I don't know who made you believe that .NET "doesnt do this" - but if I were you, I'd start double checking all other information from the same source, for it is apparently not the most reliable authority on .NET.
That all being said, I completely fail to see the acutal use of a function that tells me that a string value "is either a number or its not". What good is it to know that a value is a number if I can still not convert it to a numerical data type without the risk of getting a runtime error? You may see a good use for such a function, but I don't.
September 27, 2010 at 4:16 am
Hugo Kornelis (9/27/2010)
da-zero (9/27/2010)
So 1+1 should still be rejected in your opinion.It is. ISNUMERIC('1+1') returns 0. And that makes sense, because '1+1' does not convert to any of the numerical data types.
Dammit. I knew I should've test it before I made such a statement. 🙂
My point was that although + is not a number, the result of the expression 1+1 is a number. So I meant 1+1 as an expression, not '1+1' as a string.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
September 27, 2010 at 4:19 am
Hugo Kornelis (9/27/2010)
That all being said, I completely fail to see the acutal use of a function that tells me that a string value "is either a number or its not". What good is it to know that a value is a number if I can still not convert it to a numerical data type without the risk of getting a runtime error? You may see a good use for such a function, but I don't.
The only possible use I can think of is as a preliminary check in a user defined implementation:
if IsNumeric(@value)
begin
--It might be numeric so now do some proper validation
-- (which is probably more resource-expensive than the built-in function
end
else
--Definitely not numeric
But that's just trying to find a use for the sake of it, I don't think I'd bother in real life!
September 27, 2010 at 4:22 am
Hugo Kornelis (9/27/2010)
tommyh (9/27/2010)
I dont agree with your arguments either. A string is either a number or its not. Not depending on what you try and convert it to. It should be one or the other.If that's your point of view, then you should be happy with the current implementation of ISNUMERIC. "2e1" is a valid number.
I already said that all programming languages I have worked with recognise 1e2 as a floating point representation for 20 (1 x 102). I had at that time not yet verified your assertion that ".NET doesnt do this. Old VB6 does...". I have now. Using Visual Studio 2005, I opened a VB.Net project, edited a line to include the numeric constant "1e3", and I Visual Studio automatically changed it to "1000.0". I then tried the same with "1.23e-15", and VisualStudio changed that to "1.23E-15". Both versions could be compiled and executed.
I then tried the same with a C# project. This time, the code was not changed, but it still compiled and executed without problems.
So, I don't know who made you believe that .NET "doesnt do this" - but if I were you, I'd start double checking all other information from the same source, for it is apparently not the most reliable authority on .NET.
That all being said, I completely fail to see the acutal use of a function that tells me that a string value "is either a number or its not". What good is it to know that a value is a number if I can still not convert it to a numerical data type without the risk of getting a runtime error? You may see a good use for such a function, but I don't.
decimal.TryParse("2e1",out d) gives a False. Int version does the same. So right back at you.
/T
September 27, 2010 at 4:41 am
tommyh (9/27/2010)
Hugo Kornelis (9/27/2010)
tommyh (9/27/2010)
I dont agree with your arguments either. A string is either a number or its not. Not depending on what you try and convert it to. It should be one or the other.If that's your point of view, then you should be happy with the current implementation of ISNUMERIC. "2e1" is a valid number.
I already said that all programming languages I have worked with recognise 1e2 as a floating point representation for 20 (1 x 102). I had at that time not yet verified your assertion that ".NET doesnt do this. Old VB6 does...". I have now. Using Visual Studio 2005, I opened a VB.Net project, edited a line to include the numeric constant "1e3", and I Visual Studio automatically changed it to "1000.0". I then tried the same with "1.23e-15", and VisualStudio changed that to "1.23E-15". Both versions could be compiled and executed.
I then tried the same with a C# project. This time, the code was not changed, but it still compiled and executed without problems.
So, I don't know who made you believe that .NET "doesnt do this" - but if I were you, I'd start double checking all other information from the same source, for it is apparently not the most reliable authority on .NET.
That all being said, I completely fail to see the acutal use of a function that tells me that a string value "is either a number or its not". What good is it to know that a value is a number if I can still not convert it to a numerical data type without the risk of getting a runtime error? You may see a good use for such a function, but I don't.
decimal.TryParse("2e1",out d) gives a False. Int version does the same. So right back at you.
/T
Correct. And double.TryParse("2e1,out d) gives a True and sets d to 20.0. Exactly as expected.
Remember, I was the guy who said that ISNUMERIC() sucks because it doesn't differentiate between data types, and you were the one claiming that a string is either numeric or it isnt. Yet, the .Net code you use to support your point uses different methods for each data type - exactly what I want in SQL Server, and what you say is irrelevant.
September 27, 2010 at 6:06 am
foxxo (9/27/2010)
Does the CTE with UNION ALL increment i? It needs to increment in each column? I no comprehende
Yes. This technique is called a recursive CTE. It's a way of generating a sequence of rows without using a tally table. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186243.aspx for more details.
September 27, 2010 at 6:27 am
Thanks for the good discussion. For the record, I agree with Hugo -- ISNUMERIC doesn't give you very good information because it's test is overly broad.
For example,
\- ,,.,
succeeds in ISNUMERIC() because that converts to a MONEY value of 0.
If you want to see some of the other odd things that are considered numeric by this function, try this:
declare @limit int
set @limit = 4
;with l as (
select 32 as i, char(32) as s, isnumeric(char(32)) as n
union all
select i+1, char(i+1), isnumeric(char(i+1)) from l where i < 127
),
m as (
select cast(l.s as varchar(max)) as ms, isnumeric(l.s) as mn
from l
where ISNUMERIC(l.s) = 1
union all
select ms + cast(l.s as varchar(max)), ISNUMERIC(ms + cast(l.s as varchar(max)))
from m,l
where mn = 1
and datalength(ms) < @limit
and ms not like '%[0-9]%')
select ms from m
where mn = 1 and ms not like '%[0-9]'
option (maxrecursion 0)
This will return all of the strings with length of @limit or below which pass ISNUMERIC() even though they don't contain any digits.
September 27, 2010 at 6:49 am
Good discussion, good question.
September 27, 2010 at 8:04 am
Experimenting with the code in this question, I am getting different results from two SQL 2008 servers. One evaluates '\' as numeric. The other doesn't. They both have collation SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to research what setting might be different between the two servers? Thanks.
September 27, 2010 at 8:11 am
wware (9/27/2010)
Experimenting with the code in this question, I am getting different results from two SQL 2008 servers. One evaluates '\' as numeric. The other doesn't. They both have collation SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to research what setting might be different between the two servers? Thanks.
The first things to look at would be the patch level (SELECT @@VERSION) and the compatibility level (SELECT name, compatibility_level FROM sys.database)
September 27, 2010 at 8:31 am
Thank you, Hugo. (The one that evaluates '\' as a number has compatability level 100. The other one has compatability level 80.)
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply