I couldn't see how to correct it.  If you took Dan's idea
and allowed a left operand to give the time, that would be
a possibility.

If you're suggesting that this change will make it into
the language if we just fill in the J model with the right code,
I'll think about what that code should look like.  Are you?

Henry Rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Hui
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 5:22 PM
> To: Programming forum
> Subject: Re: RE: [Jprogramming] Current time: behaviour
> 
> Good point.  Why don't you make that point (and correction) 
> on the page?
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Henry Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 14:10
> Subject: RE: [Jprogramming] Current time: behaviour
> To: 'Programming forum' <[email protected]>
> 
> > The test
> > 
> > (ts -: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:) 'YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss.sss'
> > 
> > will fail if the time is updated between the reads from the clock.
> > (I don't know if that's possible in the implementation).
> > 
> > Henry Rich
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Hui
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 4:43 PM
> > > To: Programming forum
> > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Current time: behaviour
> > > 
> > > So you want to be a language implementer?  See:
> > > http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Essays/Timestamp_Extension
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Roger Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 11:25
> > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Current time: behaviour
> > > To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> > > 
> > > > That's a nice idea.  The function, not the dotage.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Devon McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 11:10
> > > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Current time: behaviour
> > > > To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> > > > 
> > > > > A nice extension to "6!:0" would be a format string, e.g. 
> > > > > something like
> > > > > 
> > > > >     6!:0 'MM/DD/YY hh:mm:ss'
> > > > > 10/30/07 14:06:13
> > > > > 
> > > > > As has been mentioned before, restricting the argument now 
> > and 
> > > > making the
> > > > > above construction an error leaves the door open for a 
> > compatible> > > enhancement like this, perhaps when Roger is in 
> > his dotage.
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 10/30/07, Randy MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...and I fail to see what quality of foreigns justifies 
> > > the domain
> > > > > > restriction.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to