Re: [Kinda OT] Could somebody double check this?

2003-10-17 Thread Joshua Hoblitt
> How about to refactor DateTime RD code into another > module? There is already enough use for rd, minutes > and seconds in other calendars to justify having a > "base module". I think we've been over this before haven't we? I thought the consensus was that a base class would be a good idea but

Re: [Kinda OT] Could somebody double check this?

2003-10-13 Thread Daisuke Maki
Okay, so now I've done a bit of tweaking to my solar longitude calculations, and I'm now off 0.99 degrees on average from Calendrical Calculations book (And you'll also notice an overflow problem somewhere in the middle) [EMAIL PROTECTED] lib]$ perl test.pl Gergorian Date | R.D | Sol

RE: [Kinda OT] Could somebody double check this?

2003-10-13 Thread Hill, Ronald
Hi Maki, [snipped] [Ronald Hill Wrote] > > This is correct, there was talk of doing this however, it > > is not easy. The last I heard, there was work on getting > > the SLA library released under the LGPL. > > (hopefully this will include a windows port of the library) > > This library has

RE: [Kinda OT] Could somebody double check this?

2003-10-13 Thread Hill, Ronald
Hi Maki, > > Hi, dt-ers. > > I've been lurking on this list for some time now, and so far I > understand that while a few people have attempted, nobody has come up > with a lunar, solar, or lunisolar calenders (at least I don't remember > seeing it on this list). This is correct, there was tal