From: Jim Ault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sort dateTime problem
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.ide.revolution.user
Date: 2005-12-15 04:48:31 GMT (20 hours and 30 minutes ago)
Works here...
sort lines of cd field "schedule.2" datetime by item 2 of each
What is the itemDel set to just before this step?
Are there any delimiters in what seems to be item 1?
Is there any reason the short date is not valid?
(eg 13/4/04 does not exist)
Jim Ault
Las Vegas
On 12/14/05 4:53 PM, "Timothy Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
One line of a script I'm working on goes:
sort lines of cd field "schedule.2" datetime by item 2 of each.
Each line has four items. Item 2 consists of dates in short date
format, e.g., 12/2/04.
All 2005 dates come up in correct sequence, from earliest to latest.
However, after sorting, 2004 dates *follow* 2005 dates, instead of
preceding them. That is not a correct sort.
Am I doing something wrong?
Hey, Jim, thanks.
If it works on your machine, I suppose I'm doing something wrong. Hmmm...
I just did quite a bit of haphazard troubleshooting. I isolated the
problem. The short dates are all preceded by a spacebar character. If
I remove the spacebar characters, the sort works correctly. This is
easily reproduced. It doesn't seem to matter whether items, lines or
words are being sorted.
I don't know about dates or times in other formats. I don't know
about more than one spacebar character. I didn't check.
Further testing shows that, in the problem script, converting a short
date to seconds, if the short date is preceded by a spacebar
character, produces a negative number. If the original date is in
year 2005, the negative seconds covert back to a date in 1950 or so.
More testing:
If I use a simple script in button or msg box, then converting
"4/19/05" to seconds produces the same value as converting
"<spacebar>4/19/05" to seconds.
OTOH, if a script with a repeat loop converts several words, items,
or lines, one at a time, from short date to seconds, a leading
spacebar character in the short date produces incorrect results.
That doesn't seem right, does it? Okay, I'll reproduce it more
carefully, just to be sure.
Yup, I reproduced it.
This seems like a flaw in the way Rev interprets certain dates, under
certain circumstances.
Comments?
Cheers,
Tim
_______________________________________________
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
