coding a data range (second post attempt) 
Author Message
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

To Jerry K., FYI: I can see the your post header to the newsgroup, but as i
try to read the post, Outlook Express says it's no longer available on the
server. Happened twice already.
/ Tomas


Thu, 19 May 2005 17:21:06 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:

> To Jerry K., FYI: I can see the your post header to the newsgroup, but as i
> try to read the post, Outlook Express says it's no longer available on the
> server. Happened twice already.

Same here except Netscape not OE.

Ted



Fri, 20 May 2005 03:22:26 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:


> > To Jerry K., FYI: I can see the your post header to the newsgroup, but as i
> > try to read the post, Outlook Express says it's no longer available on the
> > server. Happened twice already.

> Same here except Netscape not OE.

> Ted

Is this the missing post?   . . .   /phil
(if so, the problem may be the ISP  --  his or yours, or the connection between
them  --  this was garnered from Freeserve)


Quote:


>  > I have a collection of functions for that and other date related
>  > problems.  e.g. Date of day N days after/before given date, formatting
>  > dates, last day of given month, etc.
>  >  I store dates internally in the form [cc]yymmdd.  E.g. Today is
>  > 20021129.

> Does [cc] represent century? If so, you have a bug ;).

>  >  Mine are written for APL2.

>  > You are welcome to a copy if you want.

>  >       grp 'date'
>  > DATEGRP      Cal          D_S_T        Date         Day
>  > Dayofyear    Days         Daysof       Fdate        FromNow
>  > Ftime        LastDay      Month_num    Months       Now
>  > Time         date_default mAdd
>  >       {floor}Now
>  > 20021129
>  >       950501 Days{floor}Now
>  > 2769
>  >       950501 Date 1000
>  > 19980125
>  >       Fdate{floor}Now
>  > 2002 Nov 29

> I seem to remember that the Toronto Toolkit had some date functions that
> may be applicable.

> --
> Jerry Koniecki   wa2rkn   NO email at present. Try and spam me now!



Fri, 20 May 2005 18:03:21 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:

> > Does [cc] represent century?

Yes.

Quote:
> > If so, you have a bug ;).

Elucidate.

Ted



Sat, 21 May 2005 02:52:24 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:

> > > Does [cc] represent century?

> Yes.

> > > If so, you have a bug ;).

> Elucidate.

> Ted

a reasonable requirement, it seems to me, but I'll leave the original poster
to do the elucidation

all the best   . . .   /phil



Sat, 21 May 2005 03:26:58 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:

> > I have a collection of functions for that and other date related
> > problems.  e.g. Date of day N days after/before given date, formatting
> > dates, last day of given month, etc.
> >  I store dates internally in the form [cc]yymmdd.  E.g. Today is
> > 20021129.


> > > Does [cc] represent century?                                        

> Yes.                                                                    

> > > If so, you have a bug ;).                                          

> Elucidate.

Sorry for not stating it explicity.
Your format is [cc]yymmdd, thus cc=20, yy=02, mm=11, dd=29. Today is cc=21.
Did you intend to write [cc]yyyymmdd? If you hadn't written [cc] I would have
read that as year 2002, even though it violates the format.

--



Mon, 23 May 2005 04:24:36 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)
Quote:

>>>>Does [cc] represent century?                                        

>>Yes.                                                                    

>>>>If so, you have a bug ;).                                          

>>Elucidate.

> Sorry for not stating it explicity.
> Your format is [cc]yymmdd, thus cc=20, yy=02, mm=11, dd=29. Today is cc=21.
> Did you intend to write [cc]yyyymmdd? If you hadn't written [cc] I would have
> read that as year 2002, even though it violates the format.

So do you really want him to display 2101/12/05 for today?

I sincerely hope the smily means you aren't realy serious.  If you don't get you
tongue out of your cheek soon, it'll be sore in the morning.



Mon, 23 May 2005 16:29:01 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)



 > >>>>Does [cc] represent century?                                        
 > >>                                                                        
 > >>Yes.                                                                    
 > >>                                                                        
 > >>>>If so, you have a bug ;).                                          
 > >>>
 > >>                                                                        
 > >>Elucidate.
 > >
 > > Sorry for not stating it explicity.
 > > Your format is [cc]yymmdd, thus cc=20, yy=02, mm=11, dd=29. Today is cc=21.
 > > Did you intend to write [cc]yyyymmdd? If you hadn't written [cc] I would have
 > > read that as year 2002, even though it violates the format.
 > >
 > So do you really want him to display 2101/12/05 for today?

No, but if [cc] represents century, he has a bug.

 > I sincerely hope the smily means you aren't realy serious.  If you don't get you
 > tongue out of your cheek soon, it'll be sore in the morning.

Yes, I'm serious. You think this is the 20th century?

--



Wed, 25 May 2005 07:42:15 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)

Quote:


>  > So do you really want him to display 2101/12/05 for today?

> No, but if [cc] represents century, he has a bug.

>  > I sincerely hope the smily means you aren't realy serious.  If you don't get you
>  > tongue out of your cheek soon, it'll be sore in the morning.

> Yes, I'm serious. You think this is the 20th century?

It's zero origin!

Seriously, it indicates what century is desired. The 1900's were the twentieth
century, the 2000's are the twenty first etc.  Surely everyone knows that.

Aren't you being just a bit pedantic?  Personally, I think taking the purist
approach in such software would be irritating, inconvenient, and error prone.

OK for a joke though.



Thu, 26 May 2005 07:13:18 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)
I've tried to straighten out some twisted attribution here.
Apologies if I got any of it wrong.

Ted Edwards wrote ...

Quote:
> I store dates internally in the form [cc]yymmdd.
> E.g. Today is 20021129.

> Does [cc] represent century?

Ted replied:

Quote:
> Yes.

Jerry:

Quote:
> If so, you have a bug ;).

Ted:

Quote:
> Elucidate.

Jerry Koniecki wrote ...

Quote:
> Sorry for not stating it explicity.
> Your format is [cc]yymmdd, thus cc=20, yy=02,
> mm=11, dd=29. Today is cc=21.  Did you intend
> to write [cc]yyyymmdd? If you hadn't written [cc]
> I would have read that as year 2002, even though
> it violates the format.

No, Jerry.  You're taking the meaning of the word "century" from one
context and trying to force that meaning on it in a context where it means
something else.  When we speak of "the 21st Century", that is the century
we are *in*.  When we include the "century" in a number representing a
date, such as 20021029 ("ccyymmdd" format), that is the century *upon*
which we are adding the rest of the date.  Or from another perspective it
is "the century part of the current year".

They are both "centuries", but they are used for different purposes, so
they need not be the same number, even when they indicate the same time
interval.  The purpose of our entire system of describing and notating
time is to mediate communicatio/understanding among human beings, not to
constitute a rigorous branch of mathematics.  Humans -- and their
language(s) -- are not inherently logical, and we often find it easier to
work with mathematical inconsistencies that we are used to than with
mathematical rigor that we are not used to.

The "inconsistencies" in our notation of time are threefold:
    1) In combining the different levels of division, multiple bases are
used, e.g., 24 60 60 1000 for hours/day, minutes/hour, seconds/minute, and
milliseconds/second.
    2) One of those bases -- days/month -- is not even a constant, but a
function, and because of leap years there's even one month (February) for
which it is a function of the value of another division level (the year).
    3) Some of those levels appear to be represented in origin 1 and
others in origin 0.  I.e., you can have hour 0 or minute 0, but not day 0
or month 0.  But that's misleading.  The real meaning is that some
segments/levels of the time designation (year, month, day) embody the "in"
concept, while others (hour, minute, second,...) embody the "upon"
concept.  We use the number 1 to represent the interval which spans the
first month of the year, but the number 1 is used to represent the
interval spanning the *second* hour of the day.  (This is why we need to
subtract and add 1's when using "encode" and "decode" to process dates,
but not times of day.)

The conventions aren't even consistent across languages.  "Half seven" in
British English is based on the "upon" concept; it means "half more than 7
o'clock", or 7:30.  The word-for-word Danish equivalent ("halv syv") is
based on the "in" concept; it means "within and half way through the 7th
hour", or 6:30.  Russian makes it explicit, because the expression is not
"half seven", but "half of the seventh".  (Americans, on the other hand,
avoid the issue by not using an expression using "half", but always saying
"six-thirty" or "seven-thirty".)

So if you want mathematical rigor, you should probably use elapsed seconds
relative to a particular point in time, but if you want to be understood
you should use the language and notation as it's commonly accepted, and
*not* insist that others use a different standard, which will be
misunderstood by almost everyone but yourself.

                            /Jim Lucas



Thu, 26 May 2005 22:30:06 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)


Quote:
>The conventions aren't even consistent across languages.  "Half seven" in
>British English is based on the "upon" concept; it means "half more than 7
>o'clock", or 7:30.

"Half seven" in British English is slang, the correct expression is
"half-past seven", which is self-explanatory.
--
John Sullivan


Thu, 26 May 2005 23:56:07 GMT  
 coding a data range (second post attempt)



Quote:


> >The conventions aren't even consistent across languages.  "Half seven" in
> >British English is based on the "upon" concept; it means "half more than
7
> >o'clock", or 7:30.

> "Half seven" in British English is slang, the correct expression is
> "half-past seven", which is self-explanatory.
> --
> John Sullivan

Self-explanatory 4u. Someone might find it confusing, because the "past"
implies that seven is already in the past. This could as well mean "seven is
in the past, by one half of an hour". Especially when people are less
correct than you, and forget the dash. But considering what other units you
have invented, this is a minor problem :-).
/ Tomas


Fri, 27 May 2005 01:18:41 GMT  
 
 [ 32 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3]

 Relevant Pages 

1. FIRE eight, second attempt to post

2. OS-independent build of ruby (second attempt)

3. Opening a file, second attempt

4. help with sockets please --second attempt

5. C + Tk (second attempt)

6. Range on second element of key?

7. Second y-scale does not change ranges

8. Real Time Control in the Micro-second Range

9. Data Recovery SOURCE CODE ( SOURCE CODES of Professional Data Recovery Software )

10. test (dont waist your time) of comp.lang.tcl post 3rd attempt

11. ST/V 1.1 crashes under multifinder (2nd attempt to post)

12. Form posting problem and post data issue

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software