Rick Measham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Better:
> sub mfloor($) {
>return 0 unless $_[0]*1 != 0;
>return int($_[0]) if (($_[0] >= 0) || (int($_[0]) == $_[0]));
>return int($_[0]) -1;
> }
sub floor {
my $x = $_[0];
my $ix = int $x;
$ix <= $x ? $ix : $ix
On 28/2/03 4:38 pm, Rick Measham at [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thus:
> sub floor($) {
>return 0 unless $_[0]*1 == $_[0]; # This might not be the best way :)
>return int($_[0]) if $_[0] >= 0;
>return int($_[0]) -1;
> }
Better:
sub mfloor($) {
return 0 unless $_[0]*1 != 0;
return i
On 28/2/03 4:59 pm, Dave Rolsky at [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thus:
> In general, I'm not very fond of it, because its basically a dumping
> grounds of random C-interface un-Perlish stuff that IMO, would be better
> of put into smaller, better defined Perl modules.
I couldn't agree more!
Cheers!
---
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Rick Measham wrote:
> On 28/2/03 3:52 pm, Dave Rolsky at [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thus:
> > Finally, I think that Perl's built-in int() function does everything that
> > floor() is being used for. POSIX is a big memory hog, so getting rid of
> > it is a good thing.
>
> Don't b
On 28/2/03 3:52 pm, Dave Rolsky at [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thus:
> Finally, I think that Perl's built-in int() function does everything that
> floor() is being used for. POSIX is a big memory hog, so getting rid of
> it is a good thing.
Don't be too sure Dave ... years before 0 and the difference
This won't work:
# convert Julian->Gregorian...
$dtgreg = DateTime->from_object( $dt );
It needs to be:
$dtgreg = DateTime->from_object( object => $dt );
Since it inherits this method from DateTime.pm, the docs are wrong for
itself as well.
I noticed that it overrides _greg2rd and _rd2g
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Eric Cholet wrote:
> > - Added support for specifying a language by ISO code ("en" or
> > "pt-br") as well as the subclass name. Based on a patch from Erich
> > Cholet.
>
> Thanks, works great, I was able to switch my app to use DateTime's
> strftime() with languages thanks t
--On Wednesday, February 26, 2003 23:10:58 -0600 Dave Rolsky
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Added support for specifying a language by ISO code ("en" or
"pt-br") as well as the subclass name. Based on a patch from Erich
Cholet.
Thanks, works great, I was able to switch my app to use DateTime's
str
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, fglock wrote:
> About moving perl-date-time to CPAN:
> The modules will be published by their authors or by
> the project administrators?
The authors, generally.
> I suggest making a Bundle too.
Sure, we just need to figure out what goes in it ;)
-dave
/*
This is to announce a new version of Astro::Sunrise. This version
replaces the dependency on Time::Object to Time::Piece.
NAME
Astro::Sunrise - Perl extension for computing the sunrise/sunset on a
given day
SYNOPSIS
use Astro::Sunrise;
($sunrise, $sunset) = sunrise(,MM,DD,l
[snipped]
>
> About moving perl-date-time to CPAN:
> The modules will be published by their authors or by
> the project administrators?
>
> I suggest making a Bundle too.
This is a great Idea!! make them a bundle!!
>
> - Flávio S. Glock
>
> --
> In a parallel Dat
About moving perl-date-time to CPAN:
The modules will be published by their authors or by
the project administrators?
I suggest making a Bundle too.
- Flávio S. Glock
--
In a parallel DateTime:
http://lwn.net/1998/0402/a/datetime.html
published in CPAN as:
http://sea
Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But in chapter 2 of Calendrical Calculations, they say:
>
> [...] Unlike the Julian calendar, this proleptic calendar
> _does_ have a year 0.
I think that's silly. It's a matter of _notation_, and only
notation, whether one chooses to write years the his
Dave Rolsky wrote:
> So does anybody reading this object to me changing the default time zone
> to UTC? I think UTC is better than floating here simply because it's
> easier to explain.
I understand that a 'floating' date object has less information on it
than a 'UTC' date object, since the float
> Rick Measham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I figure that DateTime itself shouldn't be described as a
> 'Gregorian' module, but as a 'Gregorian AD (or CE)' module.
> This means there's a year 0 and -1 etc back to -INF.
¿Que? Why would "Gregorian AD module" imply that there is a
year 0, -1, etc.
"Lawrence K. Hixson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I found the reference on the web to this question which I
> believe adds weight to Abigail's assertion: [...]
Except that Abigail misses the fact that "AD" is a prefix
whereas "BC" is a suffix. The year after 1 BC was AD 1,
not 1 AD. She writ
16 matches
Mail list logo
