Front page | perl.datetime |
Postings from January 2003
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 11:42 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Parsing should not be in a base date time class though - it has no
> place
> there. It should *return* a base date time object, but putting
> generators in
> the same class doesn't make sense to me. I suppose you could look at
> them as
> constructors, but I'd disagree with that. A constructor should
> instantiate
> an object via the simplest means possible. Everything else should go
> in an
> external class (and if you like that class can inject methods into the
> base
> class, but no date parsing whatsoever should go into the base class
> IMHO).
I disagree. I think that some very fundamental parsing needs to go into
the base class. You should be able to construct a DateTime object for
whatever date and time you need, and to do that, it has to be able to
parse a date/time argument. But nothing fancy, just a few formats
should be supported in the base class, including epoch time, ICal, and
maybe ISO 8601. Other than that, I agree that all other date parsing
should go into another module.
Regards,
David
--
David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory
david@wheeler.net ICQ: 15726394
http://david.wheeler.net/ Yahoo!: dew7e
Jabber: Theory@jabber.org
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next