Hi John, Dave
Dave Rolsky wrote:
Ok, I applied this. Does this mean all tests pass on Win32 now?
I don't know; I'm at home (Linux only, thanks) and not at
work. I'll get the
latest CVS and double check on Monday. Is that soon enough?
John
G:\modules\DateTime.pmnmake test
Isn't that simply:
my $safe_span = ...;# Whatever you need
my dt = DateTime-new(...);
croak Bad date range if $safe_span-contains($dt);
In fact you may want the span to be a spanset to accomodate more fine
grained controls. Is this useful enough to merit a class? I dunno.
As a minor
my $safe_span = ...;# Whatever you need
my dt = DateTime-new(...);
croak Bad date range if $safe_span-contains($dt);
In my [poor] example. But what if you only wanted to only accept time values from
11:00-18:00 across a span?
In fact you may want the span to be a spanset to
Hi Rick,
Cool idea .. and I'll add DateTime::Wrapper::AllowThingsToOverflow
(or something shorter) that allows you to construct with overflowing
parameters (like 75 seconds, 124 minutes, 34 hours, 98 days and 16
months)
Are you still going to do this? I already want to subclass it for
Dave,
I am of the opinion that when go ahead and add this doc to CVS. If we hear from
modules that they have an objection then we can change it then. Or should we start
a betting pool on when we'll get a response? :)
Cheers,
-J
--
Dave already said that he was open to adding a flag to control the
overflow behavior if anyone could provide a valid reason for needing
it.
It sounds like you have a good reason, so post it and see if he will
add the flag.
-ben
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 08:43:50AM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt
Ok, lets say that you want only working hours as legal times, so
9-12,1-5, M-F from July 1st to July 17th, 2003.
Most of the code below is building the ranges... I think youy would
have to do that anyway. The real bit that the module would do is the
intersection stuff, and that is a couple of
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Ben Bennett wrote:
Most of the code below is building the ranges... I think youy would
have to do that anyway. The real bit that the module would do is the
intersection stuff, and that is a couple of lines.
There must be a way to express the same semantic meaning with
Ah! nice. I don't fully understand DT:E:Recurrence yet...
Slight correction to both scripts:
The hours should be 13 and 17 instead of 1 and 5 (damn PM...).
Then yours should be (otherwise it picks up Saturdays too):
days = [1..5]
Which is more clear than mine anyway...
-ben
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
I am of the opinion that when go ahead and add this doc to CVS. If we
hear from modules that they have an objection then we can change it
then. Or should we start a betting pool on when we'll get a response?
:)
Yeah, go ahead and add it. I'm at
I think DateTime::TimeZone::Alias 0.03 is really looking good. The
docs are excellent (small patch to fix typos included below).
I really like the new is_X subs, although in the case of the
is_alias() would it make sense to return the target of the alias?
i.e. If I have aliased EST to
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Ben Bennett wrote:
I really like the new is_X subs, although in the case of the
is_alias() would it make sense to return the target of the alias?
No, any method that starts with is_ should return a boolean value (or only
be guaranteed to return such a thing). If you need
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Hill, Ronald wrote:
t\05set...ok
t\05tzNot an ARRAY reference at
F:/perl/site/lib/DateTime/TimeZone.pm line 146.
# Looks like your test died before it could output anything.
t\05tzdubious
Test returned status 255
13 matches
Mail list logo
