[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject[>>]    [<<]Thread[>>]

Number   :  4408
Date     :  2003-04-22
Author   :  Garry Deane
Subject  :  Re: Date Macro
Size(KB) :  1


--- In xxcopy@yahoogroups.com, Kan Yabumoto  wrote:
> 
> Doug:
> 
> Currently, XXCOPY's macro feature has no provisions for
> the control of leading zero for /$mm$ or /$dd$ items.
> 
> The format that you need to work with seems especially
> poorly conceived format.

I couldn't agree more.

 

> So, while it is not technically difficult to support
> the scheme that gives convenience to you (provided
> we come up with a reasonable and easy-to-remember
> notation ---- usually a bigger headache there which
> would not collide the current keyword set (and would not
> stifle our freedom to add future extension of the set of
> macro keywords). In this case, we could simply designate
> a new "US-only" macro reference which stands for
> your /$m-d-yy$ scheme, but it would be totally unfair
> to European users who would equally argue for /$d-m-yy$
> (or, /$d.m.yy$ and so on). The logical way is
> to give a variation to each of /$mm$ and /$dd$ for
> non-leading-zero case. I just can't think of a clean
> designation for that... Can you suggest some? It
> has to be clean, easy-to-remember, and not-very-long.

Since Windows allows the setting of date formats using m/d/yy, 
mm/dd/yy, yyyy-m-d, etc., etc., I don't see it as being unreasonable 
to allow Xxcopy to support the same scheme other than to discourage 
poor practice. It would seem logical to use the same letter 
conventions as well. i.e. $yy.m.d$ means no leading zero for the day 
and month, $yy-mm-dd$ means leading zeroes. The same logic would also 
apply to $hh-nn-ss$.

I can't see that is it worth the programming effort though.

Garry



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.