Re: RFC: date parser rewrite

mark benedetto king wrote:

>4.) the following formats, which are presumed to reference midnight
> local time of the specified day.
>
> YYYY-MM-DD
> YYYYMMDD
>
>
>
Just to clarify for myself. It sounds like you mean: YYYY-MM-DD ==>
YYYY-MM-DD 24:00 (you get the idea).

Does anyone think it makes more sense for YYYY-MM-DD ==> YYYY-MM-DD 00:00?

That one stuck out at me right away since the later would be my
assumption. I tried to look for some precedents:

  o The "at" command (at least the linux one, I presume it doesn't
differ in this respect from other unices) interprets a bare date to mean
you want to run the command on that date at the _current local time_.
Weird huh? I guess it makes sense.

  o The Oracle rdbms interprets dates without time to be 00:00:00.

  o strptime (which is defined in the POSIX standard) converts just a
date spec to a struct tm with the tm_sec, tm_min, tm_hour all initialized.

Anyhow perhaps this is what you meant in the first place but "midnight
of date d" just sounds to me like the time at the end of that day rather
than the start.

-- 
Jens B. Jorgensen
jens.jorgensen@tallan.com
"With a focused commitment to our clients and our people, we deliver value through customized technology solutions."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org