> From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] better strftime support for win32 > Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:14:21 -0600 > > From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 1:42 PM > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 05:39:59PM -0800, John Sterling wrote: > > > > > > Long ago (maybe 3 years ago?) Manoj generated a patch for 1.3 which added > > > some widely used formats which were not implemented in the libc > > > implementation of strftime on win32. > > > > > > Ideally we would continue to implement formats as necessary (or should we > > > spend some > > > time implementing them all?). > > > > John and I had some time this weekend to talk about this, and I definately > > think this is the right way to go. Unfortunately, I can't test this as > > I don't have a win32 box, but here is my +1 in concept. > > +1 here as well, and since strftime() isn't even consistent on all Un*x > platforms, > we would be best off doing this; > > 1. Define our set of supported strftime() escapes. > > 2. Create a bit of autoconf magic to format a string, repleat with all > our supported escapes, and compare to our 'expected' result. > > 3. If so, HAVE_COMPLETE_STRFTIME and use the clib's implemention... > > 4. ... otherwise use the apr implementation. > > I'll commit John's code, but want to see us start testing across the board for > our agreed-upon format tokens [however we define them].
can we get this patch committed? just checking in :) sterling
