On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Dave has started down a path for something which is/will be engineered very differently from the p5 version of DateTime. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, especially in the long run, I'm just trying to start a discussion point on what the 'best' way to do things for the time being is. Hopefully sparking the interest of people (other then just Dave" to work on the p6 implementation (myself included).
Well, don't take what I've written so far as gospel. For example, the fact that it doesn't use rata die internally at the moment doesn't mean anything other than I was too lazy to rewrite the rd<->ymd stuff in P6 yet.
Anyway, if some folks want to work on a more literal port of DateTime to P6 I'd be happy to rename the stuff I've done so far to DateTime6 or something like that. The great thing about writing for pugs is that no one can complain when you break backwards compatibility ;)
-dave /*=================================================== VegGuide.Org www.BookIRead.com Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog ===================================================*/
