On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:42:35AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:58AM +0100, David Harper wrote:
> > > One really simple way to make it shorter is to say "00:00", leaving
> > > out the seconds.
> >
> > That’s a good solution. It removes the long-standing ambiguity wi
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:34:58AM +0100, David Harper wrote:
> > One really simple way to make it shorter is to say "00:00", leaving
> > out the seconds.
>
> That’s a good solution. It removes the long-standing ambiguity without
> looking too ugly.
OK, how is this patch?
--
Bruce Momjian
> One really simple way to make it shorter is to say "00:00", leaving
> out the seconds.
That’s a good solution. It removes the long-standing ambiguity without looking
too ugly.
Best regards
David Harper
Wellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge, England
--
The Wellcome Sanger Institute is opera
Bruce Momjian writes:
> The thing I don't like about 00:00:00 is that it is a lot of information
> to say "the start of the day", while I assumed midnight was clear on
> that. If we can find a way to say "start of the day (midnight)", that
> would work.
One really simple way to make it shorter
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 01:32:31PM -0400, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> On 7/10/19 6:13 AM, David Harper wrote:
> >> I actually agree with your opinion that "midnight" is fine.
> >> That text has been that way for over fifteen years[1], and
> >> nobody's complained before that it was ambiguous.
> >
> > C
On 7/10/19 6:13 AM, David Harper wrote:
>> I actually agree with your opinion that "midnight" is fine.
>> That text has been that way for over fifteen years[1], and
>> nobody's complained before that it was ambiguous.
>
> Conversely, how many users over the past fifteen years have read that table,
> I actually agree with your opinion that "midnight" is fine.
> That text has been that way for over fifteen years[1], and
> nobody's complained before that it was ambiguous.
Conversely, how many users over the past fifteen years have read that table,
and then felt compelled (as I did) to run a q
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Yes, I see what you mean now. How is this patch, which uses "zero
> hour"?
Ugh. Are we writing spy novels now?
I actually agree with your opinion that "midnight" is fine.
That text has been that way for over fifteen years[1], and
nobody's complained before that it was a
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 09:14:27AM +0100, David Harper wrote:
> > Uh, I believe midnight is always the start of the day.
>
> The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) deprecates the
> term “midnight” as ambiguous and recommmends the use of 24-hour clock
> notation:
>
>
> Uh, I believe midnight is always the start of the day.
The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) deprecates the
term “midnight” as ambiguous and recommmends the use of 24-hour clock notation:
= BEGIN QUOTE =
When someone refers to "midnight tonight" or "midnight la
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 10:07:59AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/datatype-datetime.html
> Description:
>
> In Table 8.13. Special Date/Time Inputs, the description for the speci
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/datatype-datetime.html
Description:
In Table 8.13. Special Date/Time Inputs, the description for the special
values 'today', 'tomorrow' and 'yesterday' uses the word 'midnight' e.g. the
sp
12 matches
Mail list logo
