On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Pat Maddox <[email protected]> wrote:
> Might be sloppy writing because that last sentence seems to contradict the
> first one. At any rate, I wouldn't expect that to be valid. What is 24:00:01 ?
TimeStamp fromString: '2011-09-27 24:00:01' -> '27 September 2011 12:00:01 am'
As for contradictions (if it was from my message), this behavior is
not expected by me, but it may be expected by the rest of the
community (which is what I was asking about). It sounds like it
isn't, though.
I think the method is too permissive - it probably should have
rejected my input as bad.
The code path delegates the time portion off to Time, which delegates
it off to Duration (with no bounds checks), then asks for the seconds
and nanos back from Duration via #ticks, which hides the fact that a
date boundary has been exceeded:
days := self days.
^ Array
with: days
with: seconds - (days * SecondsInDay)
with: nanos
(the seconds - (days * SecondsInDay) part).
-Chris
