On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> > > DT::TZ::LINKS is still the only internal structure that is modified.
> >
> > Yes, but you access @DT::TZ::ALL as well.
>
> I was necessary to verify that what an alias was pointing to was valid.
> Once the dependency was already there I implemented
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Ben Bennett wrote:
> Check out Dave's work on the POD to HTML stuff for the FAQ for a
> start...
Actually, the FAQ is much more complicated. For the other docs I've just
been doing
perl -MPod::Simple::HTML -e \
"Pod::Simple::HTML->filter(shift)" \
and then hand-e
Fantastic! Thank you for the summary, I will add it to the FAQ (with
appropriate attribution of course).
-ben
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:36:02PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Eugene.
>
> I'll try to rephrase this, because it
> would be good to have it in the
Check out Dave's work on the POD to HTML stuff for the FAQ for a
start...
-ben
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 06:41:16PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Dave Rolsky wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> >
> > > Should I add the namespaces doc
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Richard Evans wrote:
> * Added new locale generator (ICUGenerator.pl) which is not derived from my
> other work - this is largely untested. Locale data is not supplied and must
> be generated from ICU .xml sources.
Thanks, this looks great.
> * All manually edited code remov
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
>
> > Should I add the namespaces doc to web/htdocs/developer/?
>
> Sure, please do.
BTW, you should use Pod::Simple::HTML for the conversion, not pod2html
that comes with Perl. The latter produces really icky o
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> Should I add the namespaces doc to web/htdocs/developer/?
Sure, please do.
-dave
/*===
House Absolute Consulting
www.houseabsolute.com
===*/
Should I add the namespaces doc to web/htdocs/developer/?
-J
--
Thanks Eugene.
I'll try to rephrase this, because it
would be good to have it in the FAQ.
If somebody can explain it better, or
more correctly, please help me!
What's up with GMT, TAI, UTC, and UT1?
Before 1972, the "international time" reference
was GMT. In GMT, all days have the same number
I understand your point, however, this is not a calendar and does not
produce one yet. Sure I would like to have it create a calendar where you
say my fiscal year starts 03-01 and I have 13 periods and it produces a
calendar view of the year with 13 periods of 28 days, so Mar 29 - 31
appeared in th
http://mysite.freeserve.com/ridas/download/ridas/datetime/locales/locale20030622.tgz
Changes:
* Added new locale generator (ICUGenerator.pl) which is not derived from my
other work - this is largely untested. Locale data is not supplied and must
be generated from ICU .xml sources.
* All manually
Jesse Shy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> OK , I am coding up the port from Date::Calc::Fiscal right now. I should
> have something for y'all to look at by the end of the day ( I hope ). I
> will still have to write docs and test.
I see two problems with the name:
* it introduces two new lev
John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter J. Acklam wrote:
>
> > I don't see what the epoch has got to do with it. The TAI
> > time system is exactly like UTC except for the leap seconds,
> > and that, to me, seems very similar to what Perl is using.
>
> The epoch has everything to do with
Eugene van der Pijll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter J. Acklam schreef:
>
> > It is the IERS (http://www.iers.org) who decides when leap
> > seconds are inserted. According to their page
> >
> >http://www.iers.org/iers/earth/rotation/utc/table1.html
> >
> > the first leap second after 19
So the first shot is at http://www2.pona.net/~jshy/DTFY.tar.gz
Its 2 files, one is the module the other is a small test program. I will
actually write some tests starting this week. I know there are bugs on
the fringe dates, that is the first and last day of the year. We'll throw
this against the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef:
> http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/utc/leapsecond.
> html
>
> "... Since the system was introduced in 1972, "
>
> The table starts in 1972. Before that, GMT was
> in use - not UT1!
Not true. UT1 existed at least since 1958. In that year, TAI (atomic
time) was sync
http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/utc/leapsecond.
html
"... Since the system was introduced in 1972, "
The table starts in 1972. Before that, GMT was
in use - not UT1!
- Flavio S. Glock
Dave Rolsky schreef:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Ben Bennett wrote:
>
> > I used to live in Saudi Arabia and the weekend was on Thursday and
> > Friday (I don't know what calendar businesses used but I will ask my
> > father).
>
> If it was on Thursday and Friday it was still following the Gregorian
>
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Ben Bennett wrote:
> I used to live in Saudi Arabia and the weekend was on Thursday and
> Friday (I don't know what calendar businesses used but I will ask my
> father).
If it was on Thursday and Friday it was still following the Gregorian
calendar though. That was my basic
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Jesse Shy wrote:
> OK , I am coding up the port from Date::Calc::Fiscal right now. I should
> have something for y'all to look at by the end of the day ( I hope ). I
> will still have to write docs and test. It will have only 2 methods right
> now, day_fiscal_year - if Mar 1 i
Peter J. Acklam schreef:
> It is the IERS (http://www.iers.org) who decides when leap seconds
> are inserted. According to their page
>
>http://www.iers.org/iers/earth/rotation/utc/table1.html
>
> the first leap second after 1970 was the second before 1972-07-01
> 00:00:00 UTC.
There cannot
On Sunday, June 22, 2003 Jesse Shy wrote:
>OK, I am coding up the port from Date::Calc::Fiscal right now.
Yay. The DT project advances into a new continent of usefulness!
>It will have only 2 methods right now, day_fiscal_year - if Mar 1 is
>fiscal start, then Mar 1 is day 1 not 59; week_fiscal
On Sunday, June 22, 2003 Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
>Bruce Van Allen schreef:
>> From a string in the form MM, the DT::F::ISO8601 parser
>> should return a DT object identical to the DateTime object
>> instantiated from
>> $dt = DateTime->new(
>> year => 2003,
>> month =>
On Sunday, June 22, 2003 Dave Rolsky wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Bruce Van Allen wrote:
>> The point of DT::Format::XXX is parsing and formatting:
>> - to return a DT object if given an XXX-formatted date/time string; >>and
>> - to return an XXX-formatted string from a DT object.
>
>Well, the form
Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
>
> > Peter J. Acklam schreef:
> >
> > > I could have sworn the difference was 0 seconds between 1970-01-01
> > > and until the leap second in June 1972. I should have checked
> > >
> > > ftp://maia.usno.n
I used to live in Saudi Arabia and the weekend was on Thursday and
Friday (I don't know what calendar businesses used but I will ask my
father).
-ben
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 01:37:24AM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
>
> > Busi
OK , I am coding up the port from Date::Calc::Fiscal right now. I should
have something for y'all to look at by the end of the day ( I hope ). I
will still have to write docs and test. It will have only 2 methods right
now, day_fiscal_year - if Mar 1 is fiscal start, then Mar 1 is day 1 not
59; we
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 04:47:42AM +0200, Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
>
> If YY really is the century, you should probably return Jan 1st, 1901
> when given 20...
The example given in the spec says that given "12 April 1985" YY gives
19. So they are being a little loose with the word century...
> Dave Rolsky schreef:
> > It's really hard for me to think of a case where you would not know the
> > expected precision in advance.
It's usually true that you do know the precision in advance (not always) but not ALL
handling of time involves knowing the year.
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Eugene van
I forgot to add that it's dependant on the CVS version of DT.
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> http://kolea.ifa.hawaii.edu/~jhoblitt/pm/DateTime-Format-ISO8601-0.01.tar.gz
>
> This is the code I'm expecting to become DT::F::ISO8601::Simple or the the like.
>
> supports all the ISO
http://kolea.ifa.hawaii.edu/~jhoblitt/pm/DateTime-Format-ISO8601-0.01.tar.gz
This is the code I'm expecting to become DT::F::ISO8601::Simple or the the like.
supports all the ISO8601 date, time, and date + time formats
expanded formats are support with a fixed 6 digit year
Please see the
Dave Rolsky schreef:
> Here's the thing. Yes, the object would contain more precision than the
> original data, _but_ presumably if you are only exchanging "year and
> month" data, then you will only look at the year and month of the returned
> object.
>
> It's really hard for me to think of a ca
Ben Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> There is a related question about what I should _really_ be returning
> for the reduced formats. For example, the format matches a year,
> right now I return Jan 1st of the year, or YY gives a century, so if
> given 20 I return Jan 1st, 2000.
Bruce Van Allen schreef:
> I think the conclusion is _not_ to consider something like 2003-06 as
> a span.
Agreed.
> From a string in the form MM, the DT::F::ISO8601 parser
> should return a DT object identical to the DateTime object
> instantiated from
> $dt = DateTime->new(
> year
> > DT::TZ::LINKS is still the only internal structure that is modified.
>
> Yes, but you access @DT::TZ::ALL as well.
I was necessary to verify that what an alias was pointing to was valid. Once the
dependency was already there I implemented the rest.
Everything thats there (and it is pretty s
35 matches
Mail list logo
