From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8911F9E0 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:32:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728542AbgDXRcH (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 13:32:07 -0400 Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk ([85.233.160.19]:53518 "EHLO smtp.hosts.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726908AbgDXRcG (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 13:32:06 -0400 Received: from [92.30.123.115] (helo=[192.168.1.39]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1jS2BJ-0007Un-A3; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:32:05 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] date.c: skip fractional second part of ISO-8601 To: Junio C Hamano , Danh Doan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Brian M . Carlson" References: <20200423011812.GA1930@danh.dev> <1861c472-7756-d433-9185-d83c03d72b9b@iee.email> <20200424000707.GB1949@danh.dev> From: Philip Oakley Message-ID: <2db49b07-8244-269a-368b-63f6890e31d5@iee.email> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:32:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio is correct. On 24/04/2020 01:46, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Danh Doan writes: > >> On 2020-04-23 21:41:49+0100, Philip Oakley wrote: >>> On 23/04/2020 20:28, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> Danh Doan writes: >>> Would is_hhmmss() and is_yyyymmdd() be more obvious abbreviations for >>> most readers? >>> >>> Now that I type them, they do feel that bit too long... , as naming is >>> hard, maybe stick with the yms and hms, though I do keep wanting to type >>> ytd for the former.. >> Not sure if I interpret your opinion correctly, >> Did you mean s/yms/ymd/ and s/ytd/ymd/? >> >> Even that, I couldn't grasp the meaning of the last phase? > Here is how I understood it. > > Philip thinks, and I admit I have to agree with, that HMS would not > be understood as hour-minute-seconds by most people, and YMD would > not be as yearh-month-day, either. > > His "yms" in "stick with the yms and hms" is a typo of "ymd". He is > saying that even though YYMMDD and HHMMSS would look a lot more > natural, it is too long to type so YMD and HMS may not be so > terrible a compromise. > > With the "ytd" in the last one, he is saying that another downside > of saying "ymd" (other than that it is not how we usually spell > year-month-date), even though "ymd" might be an acceptable > compromise, is that it is too easy to get confused with year-to-date > that is commonly abbreviated as "YTD". True. -- Philip