<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Annoying Nulls in SQLParameters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx</link>
	<description>C# articles and tutorials on SharpDeveloper.NET</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 04:33:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sameer Alibhai</title>
		<link>http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-8387</link>
		<dc:creator>Sameer Alibhai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:13:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/?p=485#comment-8387</guid>
		<description>You are right, if you can modify the source code of the stored proc, that is a good option too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are right, if you can modify the source code of the stored proc, that is a good option too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David W</title>
		<link>http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-8385</link>
		<dc:creator>David W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/?p=485#comment-8385</guid>
		<description>Rather than hack the parameter creation code, you might want to consider putting a default value of null in the relevant stored procedure parameter, then passing null (not DBNull) as the parameter. The data code will be interpreted as the parameter being missing, which will then be covered by the default value in the procedure...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rather than hack the parameter creation code, you might want to consider putting a default value of null in the relevant stored procedure parameter, then passing null (not DBNull) as the parameter. The data code will be interpreted as the parameter being missing, which will then be covered by the default value in the procedure&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sameer Alibhai</title>
		<link>http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-7807</link>
		<dc:creator>Sameer Alibhai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 21:55:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/?p=485#comment-7807</guid>
		<description>I dont quite understand.. can you be more explicit?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dont quite understand.. can you be more explicit?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felipe Fujiy</title>
		<link>http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/archive/2009/08/07/annoying-nulls-in-sqlparameters.aspx/comment-page-1#comment-7806</link>
		<dc:creator>Felipe Fujiy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sharpdeveloper.net/content/?p=485#comment-7806</guid>
		<description>Its more easy do:

parameter??DBNull.Value</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its more easy do:</p>
<p>parameter??DBNull.Value</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
