Re: Standard library - date and time
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
> > > Anyway, the earlier code is broken the better.
> > This is what I meant to convey. If the code is going to break "eventually,"
> > now is better than later.
> The code is broken? How? Why does it need broken?
No, it's not broken (yet). I'm saying that we should co-opt date() and time()
to do what they really should do: give the date and give the time. Yes, that
will break code, but I think it benefits the language going forward.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
