From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jul 29 22:33:34 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA09953
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 29 Jul 1997 22:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from x22 (ppp6495.on.sympatico.ca [206.172.208.87])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA09947;
          Tue, 29 Jul 1997 22:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by x22 (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA00276; Wed, 30 Jul 1997 01:33:00 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 01:32:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tim Vanderhoek <tim@x22>
Reply-To: ac199@hwcn.org
To: grog@FreeBSD.ORG
cc: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>, dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: date(1)
In-Reply-To: <199707300433.OAA00328@freebie.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970730012416.202A-100000@x22>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 30 Jul 1997 grog@FreeBSD.ORG wrote:

> >>>>>> [yy[mm[dd[hh]]]]mm[.ss]]

At risk of missing the obvious, why can't the above simply be
extended to

[cc[yy[mm[dd[hh]]]]]mm[.ss]]

?  This format strikes me as being right since any usually, if the
date is off by a large amount (eg. centuries), the year, month, day,
hour, and minute will also be off.  However, the date being off by a
minute or two, while the hour, day, month, year, and century are
correct is not unusual.

This seems to avoid the below monstrosities.

> >> 	[[[cc]yy[mm[dd[hh]]]]mm[.ss]]
> >>> cc[yy[mm[dd[hh]]]]]mm[.ss]]

The first is hopelessly ambigious and the 2nd is hopelessly
annoying.


--
 tIM...HOEk
OPTIMIZATION: the process of using many one-letter variables names
              hoping that the resultant code will run faster.