Re: [boost] [gsoc 2013] draft proposal for chrono::date

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc 2013] draft proposal for chrono::date
From: John Bytheway (jbytheway+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-05 10:52:03

On 2013-05-05 07:28, Rob Stewart wrote:
> On May 4, 2013, at 5:16 PM, Anurag Kalia <anurag.kalia_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> As for the constants, the jan, feb, ..., dec as well as sun, ..., sat are there.
> 
> OK
> 
>> Moreover, there are also _1st, _2nd, ... , _31st and last.
> 
> Why not use (and extend) the placeholders used for bind?

Which bind?  std?  boost?  The Boost.Bind placeholders should be avoided
because their position in the global namespace has caused lots of grief.

I'd say overloading any of these placeholders is confusing and dangerous.

> date(_1, dec, 2013);
> 
> Those are shorter and less prone to sounding odd. By the latter I
> mean that I'd never say "first December 2013", but would s/first/one/. OTOH,
> I would say "December first, 2013", so perhaps we could offer ordinals, too.
>
> Given your preference to provide support only for the YMD order,
> which is not an order I would speak otherwise, I don't know whether "first" or
> "one" is more natural, so maybe that also argues for both.

FWIW, I would say "first December", not "one December" (although I'd be
more likely to say "December first" or even "December the first" than
either of those).  I'm a native British English speaker.

John Bytheway