On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 03:19:44PM -0400, Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) wrote:
I'm thinking that a way to reduce the amount of coding to take care of wide-ranging tm_year values is to have asctime rely on strftime to get a correct year string. Can anyone else think of problems with this approach?
A couple of annoying details crop up in trying to match a strftime() format against what the C standard says that asctime()'s format should be: 1. The standard says asctime()'s day-of-month should be "%3d". For in-range values this can be a strftime " %e", but for out-of-range values there's not a good alternative. 2. The standard uses "%d" for the year, but "%Y" zero-pads when the field width would otherwise be shorter than 4 characters. --Ken Pizzini