Dave Rolsky wrote:
It has a pretty different API, in that it's new() constructor accepts
anything without validation.
I suppose it could check for extra args and call DateTime::Fat-new() if
needed.
Can we split the existing new() into validation vs. object creation and share it
between the
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Rick Measham wrote:
Dave Rolsky wrote:
It has a pretty different API, in that it's new() constructor accepts
anything without validation.
I suppose it could check for extra args and call DateTime::Fat-new() if
needed.
I think that'd be a possibility, but it'd have to
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 12:20:50AM -0400, Ronald J Kimball wrote:
Fortunately, you don't really need to convert your dates into time values,
just so you can convert them back into dates. Some modules which may be
more useful in this case include Date::Manip, Date::Calc,
On 7/7/05 12:12 AM, Rick Measham wrote:
Dave Rolsky wrote:
DateTime::Shim
DateTime::Trampoline
DateTime::ThinShim
DateTime::Proxy
DateTime::Diet - not awful but a little cute, methinks ;)
Of the above, I still like DT:Diet.
If you want something less cute/more serious how
Scott R. Godin wrote:
I'm sort of surprised that there is no equivalent DateTime-using module
that would mirror the capabilities of Date::Parse. Dave, Have you talked
with Graham Barr at all about merging the arbitrary-date-parsing
capabilities (of Date::Parse) into the DateTime family tree?