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/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
