Perrin Harkins wrote: >I tried making a Strptime object with pattern '%I %p' but that seems >to just return undef when I try to parse these times.
%I only does the hour. You'd need "%I:%M %p" to parse the string you gave. If the input is from a human, though, DT::F::Natural might be a better choice: you don't have to tell it what the format is. > It looks like >maybe I want a DateTime::Incomplete, You could use one to represent the time-of-day on its own, and that class then provides a method to merge it with the date to make a complete DateTime. You don't win much from this. I think it's only useful if the parts you're merging don't always have the same boundary. Say, if you sometimes want to include the day-of-month in your time-of-day string. > but it's not clear how to make >one from a string. Yes. DT::F::Strptime is logically an appropriate tool for this, but it doesn't actually provide output in DT::Incomplete form. Likewise DT::F::Natural. > And it also looks like maybe I want a >DateTime::Duration since I want to add it to my DT object, No. That would be appropriate if you were starting from a base time and adding on a duration (such as 10 hours and 30 minutes). That's not what you're doing. You're constructing the representation of a point in time by taking parts of that representation from different places. It's a piecewise construction, not an addition of complete entities. >I ended up parsing the string myself and calling set methods on the >DT, but that seems pretty lame with all of these classes available. It's not a bad way, especially if the string format is fixed. With DT::F::Strptime doing its bit, you still need to use the set methods to copy the time-of-day from one DT object to another (since DT::Incomplete isn't doing that for you). -zefram
