On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >3. It no longer has a unix specific flavour (PS I am not anti-unix in any
> >sense) so Mac, VMS and Windows users feel less confused.
>
> Did it get decided that we were *supposed* to make Unix and C programmers
> feel more confused and less at home
[I might join perl6-language some day, but until then, please CC me on all
Time::Object related messages]
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:14:22 +0100 (BST), Matt Sergeant wrote:
>I used to be a C programmer myself (well OK, I was a C++ programmer...),
>but I'd rather any day type "local
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Hildo Biersma wrote:
> >
> > I'd either leave that as (localtime)[3,4,5] (please read the man page for
> > Time::Object), or understand that there's absolutely no need to separate
> > off the variables like that in an object oriented interface:
>
> Ah, but we could make the
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >I'd either leave that as (localtime)[3,4,5] (please read the man page for
> >Time::Object), or understand that there's absolutely no need to separate
> >off the variables like that in an object oriented interface:
>
> > my ($day, $month, $year) =
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 01:44:28AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 11:07:02AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Basically, you don't want to go anywhere near this mess; it eats people.
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > > I see two reasona
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > While I think Time::Object is a really great module, and following these
> > discussions I'm thinking of adding a date() function to it
>
> Aaah! Please don't. :-) Name it something else, por favor (or at least
> wait until this is finalized and make t
