Ok, this is wack. When I ask the object for delta_days or just days
what is it going to give me?
Uhh... the same thing it always has? Maybe I'm missing your point. We're talking
about overloaded operators returning another duration object. Why would that change
the return of methods?
-J
I mentioned this to Dave offlist and he suggested I post a message
here. The next release of OpenInteract relies on DateTime so I'm
interested in keeping up-to-date PPM builds for Win32 folks. The
links to the PPM repository from the datetime.perl.org site seem a
bit out of date, particularly
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Hill, Ronald wrote:
You can do ./Build dist. The latest Module::Build beta
(0.18_02) also
I tried this. Here is the result.
Creating DateTime-TimeZone-0.21.tar.gz
Can't locate object method create_archive via package Archive::Tar at
F:\pe
ild/Base.pm line 1323.
Hi Dave,
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Hill, Ronald wrote:
[snipped]
Hmm, the recent releases of Archive::Tar are totally
rewritten in Perl, primarily in order to work
consistently across all platforms. What
version do you have?
I curently have version 0.23
I checked th eBuild.pl file and
How about a DT::Duration::Set class?
add() pushes a duration object into a DT::D::Set object
_collapse() would call a 'sum' method on a DT::D::Set object
_collapse_to_datetime() would call _collapse (or the 'sum' method
directly) on a DT::D::Set object and add the resulting DT::D
This question has crossed 3 lists that I'm on in various forms (datetime, pdx.pm,
plug) and probably a few others. Maybe an out of town geek page would be a good idea?
I'd volunteer to do it but I count as out of town now. :)
Things to list:
hotels with connectivity
links to the
Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
This question has crossed 3 lists that I'm on in various forms (datetime, pdx.pm, plug) and probably a few others. Maybe an out of town geek page would be a good idea?
Add anything that you find missing here:
http://oscon.kwiki.org/index.cgi?HomePage
John (who saw this
Looks good Ben. The timezone stuff must have been fun. :)
I ported a small piece of code (in production though) from Date::Manip to DT not long
ago. I've been meaning to post the diffs and the benchmarks to the list. I'll do it
as soon as I'm back on a fast connection.
Sometime I want to
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 09:04:14AM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Looks good Ben. The timezone stuff must have been fun. :)
Fun in which sense of the word :-)
I ported a small piece of code (in production though) from Date::Manip to DT not
long ago. I've been meaning to post the diffs and
Ben Bennett wrote:
No DT::F::ISO8601 (::?) is still a separate beast (which may get
called by DT::F::Complex). ISO8601 parsing is pretty much done except
for recurrences... I have some questions how to translate a
recurrence that has 5 instances 20 minutes apart but does not give a
start or
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 07:36:48AM -0700, Hill, Ronald wrote:
Yes, and so will Date::Calc (that is what I use) But I wanted to use only
one
Date module. It makes no sense to use say Date::Calc with DateTime.
I know you provided a code snippet below, but in general when using
Date::Calc do you
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Agreed. I think it should boil down to recurrences and durations.. If
most people need that functionality then lets call your module
DT::F::ISO8601 and I'll use ISO8601::Simple. If they don't then I'll
take ISO8601 and you can use ISO8601::Complex.
Is there any reason it can't all go in one module? I think that'd be much
easier for end users.
Yes. Ben and I have discussed this off list. In fact that discussion is, I believe,
where the DT::F::DateManip module came from. I started on this several months ago and
never got around to
My module is a superset of Joshua's... however, mine still needs the
interface to be polished (I plan on adding a way to select which
optional pieces of ISO8601 are legal).
Hmm... I could use your module for recurrence and duration parsing.
-J
--
14 matches
Mail list logo
