OpenEuphoria

RE: Time conversion...

• Posted by Kat <gertie at PELL.NET> Feb 26, 2001
• 366 views

On 26 Feb 2001, at 6:23, Al Getz wrote:

> Hi again "LEV",
> 
> leviathan at uswest.net wrote:
> > Whoa, wow, okay... I'm very impressed :)
> > 
> > Clearly the tightest fuction here was Jiris secs2mins function, blew 
> > my
> > mind away when I saw that all the fuctions that did it came out to do 
> > all
> > the same thing :) And look what it took me! Too many lines of code! 
> > Whee!
> > 
> > Anyway, thanx everyone for contributing, can we stick this into the 
> > EuSLP? (Eu Standard Libraries Project?)
> > 
> > Thanx all,
> > 
> > --"LEVIATHAN"
> > 
> > 
> 
> In my opinion, if your going to wrap a time function like that
> you should go all the way and include hours as well, in case
> someone inputs a high number for the seconds parameter.  This
> way you get the output
>   05:02:03  {hours:mins:secs}
> for an input of
>   5*60*60 + 2*60 + 3
> instead of an output of
>   302:03   {mins:secs}
> 
> Secondly,
> using an integer as input parameter means the user has to
> round the seconds input themselves.  Rounding within the 
> function (passing atom) means you can get
>   119.99 seconds
> to come out as
>   00:02:00  {hours:mins:seconds}
> without bothering the user with this detail.
> 
> The shortest function isnt always the best, as the most versatile
> functions are almost always longer then any others and are more
> suited to inclusion into a library.
> Consider a second parameter, that specifies whether or not to
> output
>   hours:mins:secs
> or just
>   mins:secs
> or even
>   days:hours:mins:secs
> or even several other formats to cover many possible applications.

Yeas, the "standard" usa time/date formats are not "standard" in the rest of the
world.
And there is more than one calendar too. Different knowledge domains have
different
methods of tracking time as well.

Kat