Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
Smylers wrote: Ron Blaschke writes: DateTime::Format::ISO8601 feels rather heavyweight, with dependencies on DateTime DateTime _is_ quite heavyweight, but it's also generally right, and there's a whole suite of modules which work with it, meaning that you can live almost entirely in the DateTime world for all your date- and time- stuff. For any one individual task you can likely come up with a module which just does that and does it more leanly, but there is an advantage in having various date- and time-based modules working together, and also in having them being based on something which gets right all the really awkward bits (such as leap seconds, time zones, and daylight-saving time); even if you don't need that, somebody else will. It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg thing, but obviously DateTime is only an awkward prerequisite of a module if you don't already have it installed. And the more people who embrace DateTime, the more it will be seen as a reasonable module for othewr things to be based on. I spent some time thinking about this, and I guess you are right. It's probably best to contribute to DateTime. Thanks for your advice, Ron
Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 10:07:22PM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: Hi Ron, * Ron Blaschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-05-26 22:00]: I'm thinking about writing an ISO 8601 module, and would like to know if you guys would consider it useful. see HTTP::Date. There's not just that; if you enter 'ISO8601' into search.cpan.org, one immediately finds Datetime::Format::ISO8601 and Date::ISO8601. Is there some problem with all three of these? Could one of them be improved to meet your needs? -- Benjamin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
A. Pagaltzis wrote: Hi Ron, * Ron Blaschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-05-26 22:00]: I'm thinking about writing an ISO 8601 module, and would like to know if you guys would consider it useful. see HTTP::Date. The fact that it’s burried inside libwww-perl has annoyed me more than once, though. Nice, that's quite what I was thinking about, although with more formats. Thanks for the pointer. Would you need support for the other formats supported by HTTP::Date as well? Ron
Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
Benjamin Smith wrote: On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 10:07:22PM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: Hi Ron, * Ron Blaschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-05-26 22:00]: I'm thinking about writing an ISO 8601 module, and would like to know if you guys would consider it useful. see HTTP::Date. There's not just that; if you enter 'ISO8601' into search.cpan.org, one immediately finds Datetime::Format::ISO8601 and Date::ISO8601. Is there some problem with all three of these? Could one of them be improved to meet your needs? I have looked at both. DateTime::Format::ISO8601 feels rather heavyweight, with dependencies on DateTime and DateTime::Format::Builder, and seems to be able to parse, but not format. Unless I got something wrong, Date::ISO8601 can format dates, but can't handle time or parse. There is another one, Date::ISO, which seems also be intended for dates, too. HTTP::Date would have been the best fit for what I needed recently; if only I had known it's there. I needed simple time - ISO8601 conversion for timestamps, with ActiveState's distribution installed on Windows, without being able to install additional modules - though being able to co-locate them with my program. libwww-perl would even have been bundled with ActiveState's distro. Ron
Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
Ron Blaschke writes: DateTime::Format::ISO8601 feels rather heavyweight, with dependencies on DateTime DateTime _is_ quite heavyweight, but it's also generally right, and there's a whole suite of modules which work with it, meaning that you can live almost entirely in the DateTime world for all your date- and time- stuff. For any one individual task you can likely come up with a module which just does that and does it more leanly, but there is an advantage in having various date- and time-based modules working together, and also in having them being based on something which gets right all the really awkward bits (such as leap seconds, time zones, and daylight-saving time); even if you don't need that, somebody else will. It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg thing, but obviously DateTime is only an awkward prerequisite of a module if you don't already have it installed. And the more people who embrace DateTime, the more it will be seen as a reasonable module for othewr things to be based on. ... and seems to be able to parse, but not format. I haven't looked at DateTime::Format::ISO8601, but if that is the case then I suspect it's because DateTime emits in ISO 8601 format by default, so you don't need to do anything special to get it. Smylers
ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
Dear Module Authors, I'm thinking about writing an ISO 8601 module, and would like to know if you guys would consider it useful. I have the following in mind: - It should parse and format ISO 8601 - It should be simple (no fancy date arithmetics, ..), and have minimal dependencies - There should be an API similar to [local|gm]time and Time::Local::time[local|gm] - For example: perl -MTime::ISO8601 -e print scalar iso8601time 2006-05-26T20:42:16+02:00 - Probably called Time::ISO8601 ? Any comment is greatly appreciated, even if you think the idea is silly. Ron
Re: ISO8601 Module: Would this be worth writing?
Hi Ron, * Ron Blaschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-05-26 22:00]: I'm thinking about writing an ISO 8601 module, and would like to know if you guys would consider it useful. see HTTP::Date. The fact that it’s burried inside libwww-perl has annoyed me more than once, though. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
