On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Paweł Blokus <[email protected]> wrote: >> Subtracting a date from another date produces another date, not an interval. >> >> In any case, the code isn't used AFAIK. > > Does this mean it won't be in the future? Is this legacy code or is it > just meant to provide the full functionality in the library?
I don't think it will be used in the future. Now that we use Boost, I would think that using Boost's datetime functionality would be a better solution in the future. > I've got also an additional question. In some cases DateTime and Time > are treated like they should have the microseconds component > (DateTime::to_string, and formats for both of them in > temporal_format.h) and in others like they shouldn't > (DateTime::is_valid, Time::to_string). So, what is the right way? The microsecond mess is due to some things we inherited from MySQL, which accounts for microseconds but only in certain cases, and it never *stores* microseconds in any data type. The right way is difficult to say, since what is in there is "the MySQL way" unless the MySQL way resulted in bad data input (not valid in the case of microseconds). So, what's in there passes tests for the MySQL test suite we inherited...and it was decided that we should correspond as much as possibly to the MySQL way of handling datetimes. > With exception of the above and some more advanced from_string tests > (which are ready, but the parameterized tests feature from google > tests isn't compiling for some reason) temporal.h is fully tested Awesome! Nice work! -jay _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
