Re: Get the right C compiler?

2003-08-11 Thread Iain Truskett
* Dave Rolsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [10 Aug 2003 00:38]: > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Iain Truskett wrote: > > This make sense? make's default $(CC) may have no relation to > > the one Perl was compiled with, so shouldn't we use what > > knowledge we can get? > > > > > > Index: Makefile.PL > > ===

Re: RFC: DateTime::TimeZone::LMT

2003-08-11 Thread Rick Measham
On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:02:02AM +1000, Rick Measham wrote: What do people think? I can provide patches for this if I'm not the only one who'd find it useful. Ben replied: No, I would like this too. Perhaps the functionality can be rolled into DT::Alias somehow. They seem related... Nah, it h

Re: DateTime->localtime() (was Re: DT::TZ test failure)

2003-08-11 Thread John Siracusa
On Sunday, August 10, 2003, at 10:24 PM, David Wheeler wrote: On Sunday, August 10, 2003, at 07:17 PM, John Siracusa wrote: Obviously, you need currying. See Perl 6. Or create your own subclass with its own now() method that passes the argument for you. Or create a function that calls it for yo

Re: DT::TZ test failure

2003-08-11 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > I'm getting this failure from the CPAN dist and when I parse the Olson files myself. > Since 0.25 installed for me without errors at some point in the past I'm assuming > that this failure is being caused by a recent release of DT. Can anyone reprodu

Re: DT::F::Strptime dependency in DT::Builder

2003-08-11 Thread Joshua Hoblitt
> : I was recently doing lots of virgin builds and noticed a faulty > : dependency being triggered: > : DateTime::Format::Builder -> DT::F::Strptime -> DT::Language > : > : This fails since some of those are no longer on CPAN. > > Yes, and therefore also breaks the beta version of Time::Piece beca

Re: Re: [rfc] HiRes

2003-08-11 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > > On the one hand, I agree. "HiRes" is bad, and "hires" is a bit worse. > > OTOH, _so_ many people are already familiar with Time::HiRes, that having > > our own variation on it may be confusing to as many people, or more, as > > "hires" is. > > So are