Robert Elz said:
| Actually %.4d would be better.
As Paul points out, this breaks with negative numbers; %04d is better.
You'd prefer years with leading zeroes? Why?
Because that's what "constant width" says to me.
| This change could, in theory, break an existing program which relied on the | present specification. It could, but should there be any?
Why not? This started because you claimed programs were relying on the previous specification.
The mistake that was made here was in standardising asctime/ctime at all when strftime was all that was needed.
Possibly.
| For some value of "portable". There's "portable to all Standard C | implementations" and "portable to both Standard and pre-Standard C". There's only one definition of "portable" that matters - if I code in this particular way, can I distribute my code and assume that it will work everywhere (here that means, everywhere there's a compiler that claims to compile C code).
I don't believe you can write any code that that statement is true for. Clue: there are C compilers that don't implement printf().
If my code fails on *any* implementations, it isn't portable.
I think you need to meet the real world. It doesn't work like that. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive@demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: <clive@davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 Thus plc | |