On 11/25/2012 08:35 PM, Bertrand Rousseau wrote:
I was not expecting no_date to be considered as a fuzzy date. It's
pretty counter-intuitive I'd say (when a date is said to be fuzzy, I'm
expecting that it knows at least something about a given time, not
that it is undefined).
Now, given that implementation, I guess those lines can indeed be
simplified, but most of all I think there should also be a comment in
the Date class stating clearly that no_date is considered as fuzzy
then.
I find it logical -- every date that is not a proper datetime in Python
is a fuzzy date. So no_date() is a fuzzy date. However, the current
notion of GTG says that fuzzy dates are "Now", "Soon", "Someday".
On the way back, I made some refactoring as well:
https://code.launchpad.net/~izidor/gtg/header-comments/+merge/136065
Updating comments in headers
https://code.launchpad.net/~izidor/gtg/pep8-gtk/+merge/136066
(partial) PEP8ification of GTG/gtk folder. I ran out of the battery; it
is not completed but it could be merge to trunk now. The diff is now
smaller and it could be finished in another merge request.
Izidor
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~gtg-contributors
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~gtg-contributors
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
