Hi All,

Cna anybody tell me why when you are using MISSING you have to use IS-NOT and when you are using LIKE you have to use NOT?

NOT LIKE ''
IS-NOT MISSING

it got me confused just now because i had used IS-NOT LIKE '' thinking it would be the same as it is for MISSING but it isn't.

anyone know why? seems an odd inconsistancy...

Hi,

IS MISSING Command is equal to IS NULL Command in Oracle.

IS-NOT MISSING is equal to IS NOT NULL Command in Oracle.

I think now you will get clear idea about the differences.

Thanks,
Senthil

Nubi,

IS is synonym for EQ
IS-NOT is synonym for NE

When using MISSING IS and IS-NOT is more readable than EQ and NE

LIKE is a different operator which can be inversed (negated) with NOT.

quote:

Originally posted by jsn22:
Hi,

IS MISSING Command is equal to IS NULL Command in Oracle.

IS-NOT MISSING is equal to IS NOT NULL Command in Oracle.

I think now you will get clear idea about the differences.

Thanks,
Senthil

Thanks for your reply Senhill but that wasn't what i had originally asked.

Danny,

I understand why EQ isn't used and that LIKE is a different operator but i would have thought that the same would follow for LIKE as grammatically .

WHERE FIELD IS MISSING
WHERE FIELD IS-NOT MISSING
WHERE FIELD IS LIKE
WHERE FIELD IS-NOT LIKE

are the same- if its more readable for MISSING the same must be true of LIKE- either way doesn't bother me but i expected them to be consistant. either sticking with NOT or IS-NOT for both.

what does everyone else think?

This all sounds a bit like teenager speak

LIKE IT IS-NOT. WHAT ARE U MISSING? LIKE U ARE SO NOT.

Gerry

In the same vein: Can we have 'WHATEVER' as a synonym for ELSE soon.

Yeah, i must have the 'Valley-Girl' edition of WF