-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi,
On 02.05.2007, at 23:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That's neat. But if you're going to write your own date parser that > may need to handle 2-digit years, I'd suggest this refinement: an > extra > parameter that indicates whether the date is expected to be in the > future or the past. If asking the user for their birthday, for > example, you'd specify past; if asking for the date of their next gala > bash, assume future. Then, when somebody puts in 10/29/71, you won't > need any extra steps to avoid making the silly assumption that they'll > be born in 2071. No, I don't think so! There are some (different) conventions; for example: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246389/en only one example... I think REALBasic has one, too. To know this convention should be enough. For an unique date you have to use a date with a four-digit year 'yyyy'. I think that would be a better way to solve this dilemma. - -- Vincent -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iD8DBQFGOR1AKFUEqRtS0ZARAowEAKDGc3c0aXUM3r6FveD1Xs1XXFtTUACfSNVX vhlDtBo0XAn8ExCZJs1fM9M= =/D1t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
