Chris Withers wrote:
Just a note: I don't think mixing in persistance is needed.
Hmm... how so? I've always thought it quite nice that when, for example,
you store the modification time of an object in a DateTime, you can
safely update it without worrying about the whole object having to be
On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:27 AM, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
At Tuesday 22/11/2005 05:50, Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
one more question (to the public!):
do we REALLY need dates <1900 / >2036 ? using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
Sure.
At Tuesday 22/11/2005 05:50, Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
one more question (to the public!):
do we REALLY need dates <1900 / >2036 ? using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
Sure. What about birthdays of aged people? Long running forecast
[ Lennart Regebro wrote:]
> On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> i'll surely change the storage format, when rewriting it!
>
> So you plan on having some version marker, or so, which
> tells which storage format is used?
>
> //Curious.
basicall i thought about having a datei
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'll surely change the storage format, when rewriting it!
So you plan on having some version marker, or so, which
tells which storage format is used?
//Curious.
--
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content Management
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
> [ Florent Guillaume wrote:]
>
>>
>>Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
>>
>>>recently i came up here with the intention to fix DateTime#strftime().
>>>while trying this, i had to dig deeper and deeper into the
>>>implementation
>>>of DateT
[ Lennart Regebro wrote:]
> On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> do we REALLY need dates <1900 / >2036 ?
>
> Yes.
>
>> using unix timestamps for
>> storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
>> easier!
>
> datetimes are picklable, so if you are going
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> do we REALLY need dates <1900 / >2036 ?
Yes.
> using unix timestamps for
> storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
> easier!
datetimes are picklable, so if you are going to change how they are
stored (which may
[ Florent Guillaume wrote:]
>
>
> Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
>> recently i came up here with the intention to fix DateTime#strftime().
>> while trying this, i had to dig deeper and deeper into the
>> implementation
>> of DateTime and especially the timezone and daylight saving stuff.
>> to be honest,
Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
recently i came up here with the intention to fix DateTime#strftime().
while trying this, i had to dig deeper and deeper into the implementation
of DateTime and especially the timezone and daylight saving stuff.
to be honest, it's completely hacked together :(
DateTimeZone.
10 matches
Mail list logo
