Vista - SQLDBType.date

Hello,

Trying to compile some code I was given. Vs 2005 patches applied
AFAICT. Help / About reports visual studio versiopn 8.0.50727.867 and
framework version 2.0.50727.

Code references SqlDbType.date and receives compilation error that the
enumeration does not contain a definition for Date. I looked at the
definition and sure enough my enumeration ends with:

// Summary:
// A SQL Server 2005 user-defined type (UDT).
Udt = 29,

Colleague's machine shows the enumeration with 5 additional values
including Date. What's up with this?

Cheers

Ray

rbrowning1958 <RBrowning1958@xxxxxx> wrote:It looks to me like it's part of .NET 2.0 SP1 - try installing that and
rebuilding.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxx>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
World class .NET training in the UK: http://iterativetraining.co.uk

On Apr 1, 10:37*am, Jon Skeet [C# MVP] <sk...@xxxxxx> wrote:Hello,

Thanks for the reply. I've found the issue - SqlDbType.date is only
defined for framework 3.5, which I don't have installed but colleague
does. We're both using VS 2005 but he also has 2008 installed which I
don't.

Cheers

Ray

rbrowning1958 <RBrowning1958@xxxxxx> wrote:Are you sure it's in 3.5 rather than 2.0SP1? That would surprise me, to
be honest, given the way the assemblies are laid out etc. (Installing
3.5 also installs 2.0SP1.)

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxx>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
World class .NET training in the UK: http://iterativetraining.co.uk

Dans : news:MPG.225c1daf3e82f687c22@xxxxxx,
Jon Skeet [C# MVP] disait :Yes, these values only appear in .NET 3.5 (in MSDN library).
I guess they can be used only with SQL Server 2008 (new date and time
types).

--
Fred
foleide@xxxxxx

Fred <foleide@xxxxxx> wrote:Can anyone who has .NET 2.0SP1 but not .NET 3.5 installed actually
confirm this? You see, I was under the impression that .NET 3.5 only
*added* assemblies rather than modifying existing ones - whereas
..NET 2.0 SP1 replaces the .NET 2.0 assemblies.

SqlDbType exists in a .NET 2.0 assembly, hence I would expect the
addition to be part of .NET 2.0SP1.

I've got a 2.0-only VM which I'll back up and then install 2.0SP1 on to
check...

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxx>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
World class .NET training in the UK: http://iterativetraining.co.uk

Jon Skeet [C# MVP] <skeet@xxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>
Okay, I've just checked, and indeed SqlDbType.Date *is* available on
..NET 2.0SP1. You don't have to install .NET 3.5.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxx>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
World class .NET training in the UK: http://iterativetraining.co.uk

Dans : news:MPG.225c30ca4b8202acc27@xxxxxx,
Jon Skeet [C# MVP] disait :I would think the same.
Some informations about my dll (with 3.5 installed)
version 2.0.50727.1433
size 2,89 Mb (3 036 160 bytes)
last modified 24 oct 2007, 02:47:40

And reflector tells me :
'' Module System.Data.dll
Version:77dc95c1-9ba5-423b-90d1-24aef4cf8492
Location:%SystemRoot%\Microsoft.net\Framework\v2.0.50727\System.Data.dll
Size:3036160 Bytes


--
Fred
foleide@xxxxxx

On Apr 1, 1:11*pm, Jon Skeet [C# MVP] <sk...@xxxxxx> wrote:John,

I'm eating my words - I think are correct. The MSDN documentation
implies that this is only available in 3.5, but others have this
working with the 2.0 framework. I am going to reapply the 2.0 SP1 and
see what happens.

Thanks

Ray

rbrowning1958 <RBrowning1958@xxxxxx> wrote:Whereabouts, out of interest? I looked earlier, but I couldn't see any
such implications - I may just have been looking in the wrong place. If
it *does* say that, we should fire off a correction...


--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxx>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
World class .NET training in the UK: http://iterativetraining.co.uk