Hi Tom, Am 18.07.2013 um 17:56 schrieb Thomas McGrath III <mcgra...@mac.com>:
> That's weird. I still get the 16th. Can anyone else confirm the 15th? (not > doubting you Dar) > I might have to change this then… I think you can simply add two hours (2*600) to the resulting seconds and are safe :-) > Tom > > -- Tom McGrath III > http://lazyriver.on-rev.com > mcgra...@mac.com > On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:39 AM, Dar Scott <d...@swcp.com> wrote: >> On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:03 PM, Thomas McGrath III wrote: >>> I am converting the short date (08/16/13) to seconds and I get 1376625600 >> When I converted it back earlier today, I got the 15th. I guess there is a >> problem related to timezones or something. >> Consider NAMEyyyymmdd. It is easy to parse. It lists in order. It is >> somewhat readable. It is two characters shorter. Hey, you can't beat these arguments! :-D >> Dar Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
