On Thursday 09 December 2010 20:13:49 Bernard Helyer wrote: > I vote yes. > > Why? Because Phobos has needed a solid module for working with dates and > time for a long time, and neither std.date or std.gregorian filled that > need -- std.date is buggy beyond repair, and std.gregorian's API doesn't > make my normal tasks easy. std.datetime's API is fairly intuitive, and > what I would expect out of a fairly modern date/time library. There are > some bugs over here the need attending to, but I believe that the API > itself is solid, and well designed, and that it can be a solid, good > quality module in Phobos.
You've found bugs in my proposed std.datetime? If you have, please point them out so that I can fix them. I'm unaware of any bugs. The only questions that I'm aware of are whether it fully works on Mac OS X and FreeBSD. It had problems on Mac OS X, but I think that they're fixed with the svn version of druntime. I have no idea what FreeBSD's status is though. It _should_ work, but unless someone tries it out, there's no way to know. In any case, you've found bugs, please point them out. I can't fix it if I don't know that it's broken. - Jonathan M Davis
