On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 05:15:02PM +0200, Antonios Christofides wrote:
>
> I think that Time::Piece's interface is simple enough and powerful
> enough, and that it is good foundation for building more complex date
> handling (such as date parsing) on top of it. And due to the community's
> and Larry Wall's interest in the Perl date problem, it could become
> standard.
I installed Time::Piece, and looked at both the manual and the code.
I strongly disagree that Time::Piece is simple and powerful enough to
be a foundation for building more complex date handling. For two,
unrelated reasons.
- First, Time::Piece is a reference to an array, with the
attributes stored at fixed offsets. This makes inheriting
from this object a real pain - almost impossible.
- Second, just as many other Date modules, this is based on
seconds since the epoch. That just won't do. It's too limited.
It works great for the current year, and a couple of decades
in the future and into history. IMO, any foundation for a
general date module should be based on something like Julian
Days.
> Now I have a strange feeling that, for some of you, this is hardly any
> news; and if it is not, then there is a problem with the mailing lists,
> that is, the problem is being discussed on some list which I had failed
> to find, despite the fact that I had searched much 9 months ago, only to
> find [EMAIL PROTECTED], which still leaves me the feeling that someone's
> discussing these things elsewhere.
There hasn't been much traffic on this list for quite some months now.
Abigail
