Does RETURN have reserved values?

Thank you for your reply.
A long while ago I did read some article that mentioned that RETURN has a
reserved range of -1 to -99.
Is that true? Is it true still for SQL 2005? Does it have any "reserved"
values
FarmerRETURN has to be an INT.
"Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23y2BhJpUGHA.3192@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thank you for your reply.
> A long while ago I did read some article that mentioned that RETURN has a
> reserved range of -1 to -99.
> Is that true? Is it true still for SQL 2005? Does it have any "reserved"
> values
> Farmer
>|||Are you saying that this is all the limitation as -99 is int.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:eLQaxOpUGHA.5332@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> RETURN has to be an INT.
>
> "Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23y2BhJpUGHA.3192@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>|||Where did you get -99 from? Where are you getting your information?
INT supports -2,147,483,648 -> 2,147,483,647. There is nothing in there
that stops RETURN values from being outside of the range -99 to -1.
"Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:Oebf8QpUGHA.4884@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Are you saying that this is all the limitation as -99 is int.|||SQL Server used to reserve -99 to 0 for some return code of its own. This ha
sn't been the case since
at least 7.0, but perhaps you read this in some 6.5 book/doc, or earlier.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message news:%23y2BhJpUGHA.3192@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.
gbl...
> Thank you for your reply.
> A long while ago I did read some article that mentioned that RETURN has a
reserved range of -1
> to -99.
> Is that true? Is it true still for SQL 2005? Does it have any "reserved" v
alues
> Farmer
>|||Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP] skrev:
> Where did you get -99 from? Where are you getting your information?
> INT supports -2,147,483,648 -> 2,147,483,647. There is nothing in there
> that stops RETURN values from being outside of the range -99 to -1.
>
> "Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:Oebf8QpUGHA.4884@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
The question is rather if -1 through -99 is used (not really reserved,
I guess) for system return values, so it's 'better' to use -100 and
down for your own values. Googling quickly catches several posts about
it, but I didn't see any official stuff, and I have no idea if it's
something that still is valid. Someone else that has any insight?
/impslayer, aka Birger Johansson|||thank you very much. I thougt the same thing that it is no longe the case
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:ObSq61vUGHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> SQL Server used to reserve -99 to 0 for some return code of its own. This
> hasn't been the case since at least 7.0, but perhaps you read this in some
> 6.5 book/doc, or earlier.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Farmer" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23y2BhJpUGHA.3192@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>