Actually Date Masking worked a treat in C+/C++....

And as thats all the function does Geoff, I am amazed you took the
time to even try to debate it.

Look at the end of the day pressure of a release is high, but
implementation is not.



On 1/10/08, Geoff Bowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 9, 6:41 pm, "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am still trying to confirm this 100%, but so far I have looked at
> > the code and found that the code is in fact identical in both
> > DateFormat() & LSDateFormat(). The only difference that I can see is
> > that LSDateFormat has a wrapper to the main code to use local, then
> > calles DateFormat().
> >
> > So what I am saying is why was it done that way, the code cleary shows
> > it setting DateFormat() with a default Locale of US.
>
> Whoa!  I'm impressed you have the time to decompile, and analyse the C+
> + code of CF5.0.
>
> (Because if you are not analysing that release or earlier then your
> argument with respect to the code being identical is irrelevant.  Both
> functions pre-date the move to Java. And if you are looking at CF8
> byte code you might consider that the addition of locale for
> dateformat() may be the only reason lsdateformat() has been
> refactored. It might also help to understand that i18n was a *little*
> bit harder to implement in c++ for the nineties than it is in Java for
> the late naughties. I'm sure you're right though -- all the engineers
> I've met on the CF teams over the years have been thoughtless morons
> (NOT!))
>
> -- geoff
> http://www.daemon.com.au/
>
> >
>


-- 



Senior Coldfusion Developer
Aegeon Pty. Ltd.
www.aegeon.com.au
Phone: +613  8676 4223
Mobile: 0404 998 273

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"cfaussie" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to