Dick Kriesel wrote:
Not yet, Kay; that would be too easy. Although the "spec" didn't mention
that the seconds might be negative, it didn't rule it out, either. The
above function would return an incorrect value if there were a negative.
And handling negatives correctly might increase the times and counts.
Hmmm - can you give a case where Kay's method gives wrong answers
because of a negative seconds value ?
As far as I can see (both by inspection and by testing) it always gets
it right.
On the other hand, both your method and mine (which is really just a
variant of yours) get it wrong in key cases of negative seconds (e.g.
00:00:00.1 - 31 gives 0:00:0-31 for you and 0:00:0-31.0 for me -
both rather hopeless :-)
Hey, Rob, since you wrote the "spec," do negatives matter?
Yeah, yeah, it's the spec that's at fault, not the programmer :-) :-)
--
Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.10/119 - Release Date: 04/10/2005
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
