Re: glib time functions

On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Robert Brady wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Ali Abdin wrote:
> > I'd say ignore it (at least for the time being). Or have a function which we
> > can set for "early" ramadan or "normal" ramadan schedule or "late" ramadan
> > schedule. Then GLib could handle it internally.
> I think it's better to not handle it at all than to handle it which such
> flaws.  Better to press the Authorities to introduce a deterministic
> calendar instead.

Its now flawed if you take into account the ramadan schedule (which can 
easily be set with a function).

i.e. G_RAMADAN_EARLY would detract a day from everything past the ramadan 
month (9th month). G_RAMADAN_NORMAL (the default) would do nothing, and 
G_RAMADAN_LATE would add a day.

I think it can be handled, and in fact it HAS been handled on Windows 
(which is the dominant software producer in the Middle East).

If you say "no we shouldn't support it" people are going to go somewhere 
else that /WILL/ support it. If the non-deterministic calendar is good 
enough for GNU Emacs, then I think it is good enough for glib.

To say that it can not be handled is inaccurate (because I have proven 
that it can). But to say that it /should/ not be handle, I believe, is 

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]