SQL Server 2008 - How do i return a User-Defined Table Type from a Table-Valued Function?
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
Here's my user-defined table type...
CREATE TYPE [dbo].[FooType] AS TABLE(
[Bar] [INT],
)
This is what ive had to do in my table-valued function to return the type:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes TABLE ([Bar] [INT])
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Basically, im having to re-declare my type definition in the RETURN statement of the function. Isnt there a way i can simply declare the type in the RETURN statement?
I would have thought this would work:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes [FooType]
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Cannot find any help on MSDN/Google regarding this....anyone?
EDIT
I unmarked my answer, and bumping this question - as i am encountering the same scenario 6 months later.
Does anyone have any idea if it's possible to return a user defined table type from a table valued function? If not, is there a better workaround other than what i have done? (re-declare the type again).
sql-server tsql sql-server-2008 user-defined-functions user-defined-types
add a comment |
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
Here's my user-defined table type...
CREATE TYPE [dbo].[FooType] AS TABLE(
[Bar] [INT],
)
This is what ive had to do in my table-valued function to return the type:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes TABLE ([Bar] [INT])
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Basically, im having to re-declare my type definition in the RETURN statement of the function. Isnt there a way i can simply declare the type in the RETURN statement?
I would have thought this would work:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes [FooType]
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Cannot find any help on MSDN/Google regarding this....anyone?
EDIT
I unmarked my answer, and bumping this question - as i am encountering the same scenario 6 months later.
Does anyone have any idea if it's possible to return a user defined table type from a table valued function? If not, is there a better workaround other than what i have done? (re-declare the type again).
sql-server tsql sql-server-2008 user-defined-functions user-defined-types
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11
add a comment |
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
Here's my user-defined table type...
CREATE TYPE [dbo].[FooType] AS TABLE(
[Bar] [INT],
)
This is what ive had to do in my table-valued function to return the type:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes TABLE ([Bar] [INT])
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Basically, im having to re-declare my type definition in the RETURN statement of the function. Isnt there a way i can simply declare the type in the RETURN statement?
I would have thought this would work:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes [FooType]
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Cannot find any help on MSDN/Google regarding this....anyone?
EDIT
I unmarked my answer, and bumping this question - as i am encountering the same scenario 6 months later.
Does anyone have any idea if it's possible to return a user defined table type from a table valued function? If not, is there a better workaround other than what i have done? (re-declare the type again).
sql-server tsql sql-server-2008 user-defined-functions user-defined-types
Here's my user-defined table type...
CREATE TYPE [dbo].[FooType] AS TABLE(
[Bar] [INT],
)
This is what ive had to do in my table-valued function to return the type:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes TABLE ([Bar] [INT])
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Basically, im having to re-declare my type definition in the RETURN statement of the function. Isnt there a way i can simply declare the type in the RETURN statement?
I would have thought this would work:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[GetFoos]
RETURN @FooTypes [FooType]
INSERT INTO @FooTypes (1)
RETURN
Cannot find any help on MSDN/Google regarding this....anyone?
EDIT
I unmarked my answer, and bumping this question - as i am encountering the same scenario 6 months later.
Does anyone have any idea if it's possible to return a user defined table type from a table valued function? If not, is there a better workaround other than what i have done? (re-declare the type again).
sql-server tsql sql-server-2008 user-defined-functions user-defined-types
sql-server tsql sql-server-2008 user-defined-functions user-defined-types
edited Dec 16 '10 at 8:41
asked Jun 22 '10 at 1:08
RPM1984
54.8k44196303
54.8k44196303
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11
add a comment |
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
up vote
31
down vote
Even though you can not return the UDTT from a function, you can return a table variable and receive it in a UDTT as long as the schema match. The following code is tested in SQL Server 2008 R2
-- Create the UDTT
CREATE TYPE dbo.MyCustomUDDT AS TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
-- Declare your variables
DECLARE @uddt MyCustomUDDT;
DECLARE @Modifieduddt MyCustomUDDT;
// Call the function
INSERT INTO @Modifieduddt SELECT * FROM dbo.MyUDF(@uddt);
Function signature
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.MyUDF(@localUDDT MyCustomUDDT)
RETURNS @tableVar TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
AS
BEGIN
--Modify your variable here
RETURN
END
Hopefully this will help somebody.
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Ok - so it cant be done.
Easy enough to duplicate the table definition in the return type (with the use of scripting).
Still - hopefully this issue gets rectified in the next version of SQL Server.
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The syntax for CREATE FUNCTION indicates that the only way to define a table return type is by listing columns and types, a <table_type_definition>
. Even SQL Server "Denali" has the same definition for <table_type_definition>
. Although strangely, it's syntax doesn't include multi-statement Table valued functions, or anything else that references this fragment.
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I do not believe this is possible. You cannot use a UDTT as the return type of a Scalar-Valued Function because it is not a scalar value. You also cannot replace the table declaration of a Table-Valued Function with a UDTT. Repeating the table definition seems to be the only option. If we knew why you were doing this, perhaps we could find an alternative.
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Nope, afraid not at the moment, as per this question. And the following from msdn:
Restrictions
Table-valued parameters have the following restrictions:
SQL Server does not maintain statistics on columns of table-valued parameters.
Table-valued parameters must be passed as input READONLY parameters to Transact-SQL routines. You cannot perform DML operations such as UPDATE, DELETE, or INSERT on a table-valued parameter in the body of a routine.
You cannot use a table-valued parameter as target of a SELECT INTO or INSERT EXEC statement. A table-valued parameter can be in the FROM clause of SELECT INTO or in the INSERT EXEC string or stored-procedure.
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
31
down vote
Even though you can not return the UDTT from a function, you can return a table variable and receive it in a UDTT as long as the schema match. The following code is tested in SQL Server 2008 R2
-- Create the UDTT
CREATE TYPE dbo.MyCustomUDDT AS TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
-- Declare your variables
DECLARE @uddt MyCustomUDDT;
DECLARE @Modifieduddt MyCustomUDDT;
// Call the function
INSERT INTO @Modifieduddt SELECT * FROM dbo.MyUDF(@uddt);
Function signature
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.MyUDF(@localUDDT MyCustomUDDT)
RETURNS @tableVar TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
AS
BEGIN
--Modify your variable here
RETURN
END
Hopefully this will help somebody.
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
add a comment |
up vote
31
down vote
Even though you can not return the UDTT from a function, you can return a table variable and receive it in a UDTT as long as the schema match. The following code is tested in SQL Server 2008 R2
-- Create the UDTT
CREATE TYPE dbo.MyCustomUDDT AS TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
-- Declare your variables
DECLARE @uddt MyCustomUDDT;
DECLARE @Modifieduddt MyCustomUDDT;
// Call the function
INSERT INTO @Modifieduddt SELECT * FROM dbo.MyUDF(@uddt);
Function signature
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.MyUDF(@localUDDT MyCustomUDDT)
RETURNS @tableVar TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
AS
BEGIN
--Modify your variable here
RETURN
END
Hopefully this will help somebody.
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
add a comment |
up vote
31
down vote
up vote
31
down vote
Even though you can not return the UDTT from a function, you can return a table variable and receive it in a UDTT as long as the schema match. The following code is tested in SQL Server 2008 R2
-- Create the UDTT
CREATE TYPE dbo.MyCustomUDDT AS TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
-- Declare your variables
DECLARE @uddt MyCustomUDDT;
DECLARE @Modifieduddt MyCustomUDDT;
// Call the function
INSERT INTO @Modifieduddt SELECT * FROM dbo.MyUDF(@uddt);
Function signature
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.MyUDF(@localUDDT MyCustomUDDT)
RETURNS @tableVar TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
AS
BEGIN
--Modify your variable here
RETURN
END
Hopefully this will help somebody.
Even though you can not return the UDTT from a function, you can return a table variable and receive it in a UDTT as long as the schema match. The following code is tested in SQL Server 2008 R2
-- Create the UDTT
CREATE TYPE dbo.MyCustomUDDT AS TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
-- Declare your variables
DECLARE @uddt MyCustomUDDT;
DECLARE @Modifieduddt MyCustomUDDT;
// Call the function
INSERT INTO @Modifieduddt SELECT * FROM dbo.MyUDF(@uddt);
Function signature
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.MyUDF(@localUDDT MyCustomUDDT)
RETURNS @tableVar TABLE
(
FieldOne varchar (512),
FieldTwo varchar(1024)
)
AS
BEGIN
--Modify your variable here
RETURN
END
Hopefully this will help somebody.
edited Mar 12 '17 at 7:39
answered Nov 26 '14 at 22:04
James Poulose
1,5031318
1,5031318
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
add a comment |
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
4
4
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
This is a better answer than the currently marked one.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:34
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Ok - so it cant be done.
Easy enough to duplicate the table definition in the return type (with the use of scripting).
Still - hopefully this issue gets rectified in the next version of SQL Server.
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Ok - so it cant be done.
Easy enough to duplicate the table definition in the return type (with the use of scripting).
Still - hopefully this issue gets rectified in the next version of SQL Server.
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Ok - so it cant be done.
Easy enough to duplicate the table definition in the return type (with the use of scripting).
Still - hopefully this issue gets rectified in the next version of SQL Server.
Ok - so it cant be done.
Easy enough to duplicate the table definition in the return type (with the use of scripting).
Still - hopefully this issue gets rectified in the next version of SQL Server.
answered Jun 28 '10 at 3:12
RPM1984
54.8k44196303
54.8k44196303
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
add a comment |
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
6
6
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
I know this is an old question, but IMVHO you should unmark your answer and mark the answer from James as it explains and solves the issue nicely.
– slugster
Jan 11 '17 at 3:36
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The syntax for CREATE FUNCTION indicates that the only way to define a table return type is by listing columns and types, a <table_type_definition>
. Even SQL Server "Denali" has the same definition for <table_type_definition>
. Although strangely, it's syntax doesn't include multi-statement Table valued functions, or anything else that references this fragment.
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The syntax for CREATE FUNCTION indicates that the only way to define a table return type is by listing columns and types, a <table_type_definition>
. Even SQL Server "Denali" has the same definition for <table_type_definition>
. Although strangely, it's syntax doesn't include multi-statement Table valued functions, or anything else that references this fragment.
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The syntax for CREATE FUNCTION indicates that the only way to define a table return type is by listing columns and types, a <table_type_definition>
. Even SQL Server "Denali" has the same definition for <table_type_definition>
. Although strangely, it's syntax doesn't include multi-statement Table valued functions, or anything else that references this fragment.
The syntax for CREATE FUNCTION indicates that the only way to define a table return type is by listing columns and types, a <table_type_definition>
. Even SQL Server "Denali" has the same definition for <table_type_definition>
. Although strangely, it's syntax doesn't include multi-statement Table valued functions, or anything else that references this fragment.
answered Dec 16 '10 at 9:01
Damien_The_Unbeliever
190k17243329
190k17243329
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
add a comment |
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
3
3
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
So i guess the answer is still no. :) Dang. All im trying to achieve here is a type of "contract" between the UDF and the code that is calling it. Keeps the T-SQL "D-R-Y". There's not much point even using the UDTT here if i can't return it from the function. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
– RPM1984
Dec 16 '10 at 9:17
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I do not believe this is possible. You cannot use a UDTT as the return type of a Scalar-Valued Function because it is not a scalar value. You also cannot replace the table declaration of a Table-Valued Function with a UDTT. Repeating the table definition seems to be the only option. If we knew why you were doing this, perhaps we could find an alternative.
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I do not believe this is possible. You cannot use a UDTT as the return type of a Scalar-Valued Function because it is not a scalar value. You also cannot replace the table declaration of a Table-Valued Function with a UDTT. Repeating the table definition seems to be the only option. If we knew why you were doing this, perhaps we could find an alternative.
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I do not believe this is possible. You cannot use a UDTT as the return type of a Scalar-Valued Function because it is not a scalar value. You also cannot replace the table declaration of a Table-Valued Function with a UDTT. Repeating the table definition seems to be the only option. If we knew why you were doing this, perhaps we could find an alternative.
I do not believe this is possible. You cannot use a UDTT as the return type of a Scalar-Valued Function because it is not a scalar value. You also cannot replace the table declaration of a Table-Valued Function with a UDTT. Repeating the table definition seems to be the only option. If we knew why you were doing this, perhaps we could find an alternative.
answered Jun 23 '10 at 13:44
Schmalls
92411218
92411218
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
add a comment |
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
1
1
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
I know i cant return a UDT from a Scalar function. But in regards to Table functions - you are able to return tables (or table variables). A UDT is just another table so cant see why you cant return it. Oh well, maybe in the next version of SS. =) Im doing this because i have a table variable which was being duplicated amongst numerous functions/procs. Therefore i put it in an UDT to prevent being "DRY". Easier to maintain, etc.
– RPM1984
Jun 25 '10 at 0:01
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Nope, afraid not at the moment, as per this question. And the following from msdn:
Restrictions
Table-valued parameters have the following restrictions:
SQL Server does not maintain statistics on columns of table-valued parameters.
Table-valued parameters must be passed as input READONLY parameters to Transact-SQL routines. You cannot perform DML operations such as UPDATE, DELETE, or INSERT on a table-valued parameter in the body of a routine.
You cannot use a table-valued parameter as target of a SELECT INTO or INSERT EXEC statement. A table-valued parameter can be in the FROM clause of SELECT INTO or in the INSERT EXEC string or stored-procedure.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Nope, afraid not at the moment, as per this question. And the following from msdn:
Restrictions
Table-valued parameters have the following restrictions:
SQL Server does not maintain statistics on columns of table-valued parameters.
Table-valued parameters must be passed as input READONLY parameters to Transact-SQL routines. You cannot perform DML operations such as UPDATE, DELETE, or INSERT on a table-valued parameter in the body of a routine.
You cannot use a table-valued parameter as target of a SELECT INTO or INSERT EXEC statement. A table-valued parameter can be in the FROM clause of SELECT INTO or in the INSERT EXEC string or stored-procedure.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Nope, afraid not at the moment, as per this question. And the following from msdn:
Restrictions
Table-valued parameters have the following restrictions:
SQL Server does not maintain statistics on columns of table-valued parameters.
Table-valued parameters must be passed as input READONLY parameters to Transact-SQL routines. You cannot perform DML operations such as UPDATE, DELETE, or INSERT on a table-valued parameter in the body of a routine.
You cannot use a table-valued parameter as target of a SELECT INTO or INSERT EXEC statement. A table-valued parameter can be in the FROM clause of SELECT INTO or in the INSERT EXEC string or stored-procedure.
Nope, afraid not at the moment, as per this question. And the following from msdn:
Restrictions
Table-valued parameters have the following restrictions:
SQL Server does not maintain statistics on columns of table-valued parameters.
Table-valued parameters must be passed as input READONLY parameters to Transact-SQL routines. You cannot perform DML operations such as UPDATE, DELETE, or INSERT on a table-valued parameter in the body of a routine.
You cannot use a table-valued parameter as target of a SELECT INTO or INSERT EXEC statement. A table-valued parameter can be in the FROM clause of SELECT INTO or in the INSERT EXEC string or stored-procedure.
edited May 23 '17 at 12:03
Community♦
11
11
answered Dec 17 '10 at 8:26
Timbo
3,71622025
3,71622025
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f3089553%2fsql-server-2008-how-do-i-return-a-user-defined-table-type-from-a-table-valued%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Confirmed still not possible with 2014.
– dudeNumber4
Jan 22 '15 at 14:11