Hi, Quoting Santiago Vila (2016-08-18 15:01:53) > However, the way I read this: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Combined_date_and_time_representations > > there are still two allowed ways to specify the dates and the times: > the "basic format" and the "extended format". > > Both are standard and both are equally correct, but I wish there would > be a way to use the basic format instead of the extended format, at least > for the filenames of the build logs, if only because 20160818T113412Z > is a lot easier to parse than 2016-08-18T11:34:12Z for further > processing.
I'm confused about what the problem is that you want to report.
The current format of the datetime stamp in build log filenames is:
2016-08-18T17:09:36Z
To parse that you write in most programming languages something like:
strptime("2016-08-18T17:09:36Z", "%FT%TZ")
To parse a string like:
20160818T113412Z
You would write:
strptime("20160818T113412Z", "%Y%m%dT%H%M%SZ")
I find the former format string much easier and shorter than the one to parse
the latter.
So how is the latter easier to parse?
Thanks!
cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
