Re: [racket-users] puzzled by date / date*

2016-09-23 Thread Geoffrey Knauth
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 12:41:46 AM UTC-4, johnbclements wrote: > doesn’t ‘find-seconds’ do that? > > #lang racket > > (require racket/date) > > (define d1 (find-seconds 0 51 14 22 9 2016 #f)) It does indeed. Perfect, thank you! -- You received this message because you are

Re: [racket-users] puzzled by date / date*

2016-09-22 Thread 'John Clements' via Racket Users
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:38, Geoffrey Knauth wrote: > > Now I see how silly I was in what I wrote above. In each case I specified > time 14:51 and got 18:51, which means it is still interpreting my input as > local time. I want to be able to specify 1851Z and have it come

[racket-users] puzzled by date / date*

2016-09-22 Thread Geoffrey Knauth
After not getting what I wanted (I got epoch seconds reflecting an interpretation of my input as Local Time), I got what I wanted (epoch seconds interpreting my input as UTC), but now that it is working, using date* vs. date, I'm not sure why, when I vary inputs, I see no change in the output.