On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 01:27:38PM -0500, Paul Pelzl wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:58 PM, David F. Skoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > J.P. Tuttle wrote: > > > > > Oh. Support for input in 12-hour would definitely be a useful feature. > > > > Erhmm... really? How would you write it? > > > > REM AT 1:00pm ... > > > > I guess I could modify the parser to look for a suffix "a..." or > "p..." after > > a time and adjust appropriately. I'm used to 24h clock so it's never been > > an issue for me. :-) > > I have a mildly negative feeling about this. If Remind uses *only* > 24-hour time, then there is never any ambiguity. If 12-hour times are > supported, then the user has to be extra careful to always encode the > AT timespec properly. You can't even reliably drop the "a..." suffix > because 12-hour time is not 0-indexed (e.g. 12:30am -> 00:30). > > I'm a programmer, and I realize that this sometimes gives me a twisted > worldview, but frankly 12-hour time sucks. And I say this as an > American who uses 12-hour time in casual use. >
I'm a programmer too, and I *hate* working with dates, because they're so non-orthogonal. (Twenty-eight days in February *unless* ....) Twelve hour time would be a similar (though not as severe) issue. Twenty-four hour time is unambiguous under any circumstance. But more importantly... Beware of feature creep. Someone else mentioned the simplicity of *nix software interfaces. And remind lends itself to having its output piped and manipulated. There has to be some point where you, as a programmer, simply say, "Enough." And for those left out in the cold because their feature is not supported, pipe and manipulate. Paul -- Paul M. Foster _______________________________________________ Remind-fans mailing list [email protected] http://lists.whatexit.org/mailman/listinfo/remind-fans
