John Siracusa schreef: > On 7/16/03 3:39 PM, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: > > Infinite dates do not exist. > > Infinite DateTime objects do, which was my point.
The Loch Ness monster exists. That doesn't mean that DateTime::Format::Roman should accept it. > > A Format object does not have to accept every deranged monstrosity that > > is subclassed from DateTime. For example, my Format modules are > > documented to accept DateTime objects. > > DateTime::Infinite is a "deranged monstrosity" now!? Yeesh :) Regardless > of your opinion of it, DateTime::Infinite is very useful to many people. I must admit that at this point my analogy with the Loch Ness monster may be said to break down. > I never suggested that ambiguous forms should be parsed by DT::F::Simple. Not even 04/05/2003? > > If "today" is parsed, people expect "tomorrow" to be parsed as well" > > Well, you could just set a policy to avoid anything that requires date math. Is DT::truncate date math? If so, this disqualifies "today"... Oh, I forgot one: if "now" is parsed, "never" should be as well (returning DT::Undef). (That one is somewhat sensible to include, even.) Eugene
