You could use exclusive and inclusive to clarify.
between (exclusive) 1 and 10 = 1.00000000n and 9.999999999n
between (inclusive) 1 and 10 = Well what you expected it to mean in the first place!
You can't really blame LANDesk for this one.
Different SQL and other tools use every variant you can think of!
Some include the lower bound. Some exclude
Some include upper bound. Some exclude
At least if you code it you can use <= and/or >= without worrying about any BETWEEN function ;-)
If I'm between London and Edniburgh, I might be in York, or perhaps Newcastle, but you can be sure I'd be in neither London nor Edinburgh. So I think LANDesk has this one correct. "Within the range" or "Spans" perhaps?
My thinking is the same as Grahams here. When you are "Between" two points you cannot be at either of those points, because you would not be between them at all, you would be "AT\EQAUL" to one of them.
I think a good name for a new criteria as Graham says would be "Spans" or maybe even "Ranges"
Spans sounds good. I think there is a need for it because I've seen a fair number of queries people have written which trip up on this very subject. I cover it in training, but it all too easy to forget. Date ranges, process reference numbers even ordered lists could benefit from this approach. I shall raise a suitable ER shortly, more comments welcomed.
Interesting question and discussion.
In generic language, I normally use:
- between (exclusive of endpoints) == is between == between ___ and ____
- between (inclusive of endpoints) == From To == From ___ to ___
Although, not always... there are times in common speech where it's the context clues to the conversation that help indicate whether it's an inclusive/exclusive situation. So, not sure I added anything here.