Pádraig Brady wrote:
> It's not worth replacing strptime to support %q, at least until it's
> available in glibc.
OK.
> Currently there is no strptime unit test.
Ah, right. Sorry for the noise then.
Bruno
On 14/11/16 21:10, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Pádraig,
>
>> add to strptime()
>> also for consistency. Therefore I did that in the attached,
>> added a test, and pushed.
>
> If users of the 'strptime' module should be able to rely on the %q feature,
> it requires also a change in doc/posix-functio
Hi Pádraig,
> add to strptime()
> also for consistency. Therefore I did that in the attached,
> added a test, and pushed.
If users of the 'strptime' module should be able to rely on the %q feature,
it requires also a change in doc/posix-functions/strptime.texi and
m4/strptime.m4, modules/strptim
Thanks, and we can tune the gnulib strftime %q the same way as glibc so I
installed the attached.
>From 10ee65aaa991bb2260498d4d6f6ac27bce21627d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Eggert
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 17:40:26 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] strftime: tune %q
* lib/strftime.c (__strftime_intern
On 02/11/16 15:25, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 06/10/16 12:53, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 06/10/16 11:11, john woods wrote:
>>> date +%YW%V gives week and year; it would be nice if date +%YQ%q could
>>> return, eg 2016Q3 as having a quarters code in date would save AWKwardness
>>> or shell arithmetic
On 06/10/16 12:53, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 06/10/16 11:11, john woods wrote:
>> date +%YW%V gives week and year; it would be nice if date +%YQ%q could
>> return, eg 2016Q3 as having a quarters code in date would save AWKwardness
>> or shell arithmetic.
>>
>> Perhaps we could have
>> %q 1,2,3,4
>
