On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:37 AM, Craig A. Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 8:30 AM +0200 5/22/08, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>>On Wed, 21 May 2008 22:29:13 -0500, "John E. Malmberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> A todo for VMS:
>>>
>>> In [EMAIL PROTECTED], 07arith.t is dying on test 11.
>>>
>>>  From the comments, it seems that it is expecting the _strptime function
>>> (or something) to convert '2001-2-29' to '2001-3-1'.
>>
>>It's like this since a long time on all HP-UX too, and Steve P traced
>>it to be some XS problem last night.
>>
>>Matt did not (yet) reply to my mails.
>>
>>> Instead it is failing with the message "Error parsing time at
>> > ../lib/Time/Piece.pm line 615, <DATA> line 17.
>
> I noticed this too.  On VMS it boils down to passing to strptime a
> time string for 29  February 2001, but unless I've lost some time
> myself, 2001 was not a leap year, so it's not a valid time.  The
> standard for strptime is silent about what level of validation, if
> any, should be done on the incoming time string.
>
> Here's VMS:
>
> $ perl -MTestInit -"MTime::Piece" -"E" "say join '|', 
> Time::Piece::_strptime('2001-2-29 12:34:56', '%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S');"
> Error parsing time at -e line 1.
>
> Here's Mac OS X:
>
> % ./perl -MTestInit -"MTime::Piece" -E "say join '|', 
> Time::Piece::_strptime('2001-2-29 12:34:56', '%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S');"
> 56|34|12|1|2|101|4|59|0|0|0
>
> If I'm reading this right, Mac OS X (and probably other BSDs) is
> interpreting this as the first of March, which doesn't make much
> sense to me, but may have a rationale behind it.  In any case,
> Time::Piece seems to depend on this non-portable behavior, and even,
> as John noted, to be specifically testing for it.
>

Actually, there isn't any non-portable stuff happening regarding
dates.  The _strptime routine is supposed to see 2001-2-29 and realize
that you really mean 2001-3-1.  For some reason, the code works pretty
much everywhere else, but HP-UX and VMS.  Where the exact failure is,
I haven't found exactly, but once I get off my lazy backside, I'll
have an answer.

Steve Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to