Boost logo

Boost-Maint :

Subject: Re: [Boost-maint] Status of Boost.CMT libraries
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-11-30 13:18:11

On 11/30/16 21:02, Marshall Clow wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>> -- switch +/- on parsing.
>>> Definitely correct, will break code.
>> I think we should fix bugs even if it breaks code. We could try to make it
>> less painful though.
> I'm really reluctant to make this change. I see it breaking lots of
> people's code for a small benefit.
> Short synopsis:
> There are two ways to describe a timezone difference from GMT (only two?
> You must be mad! - Ok, two in this instance).
> * Going west is negative. This reflects the fact that the time "gets
> earlier" as you go west. In this scheme, San Diego is GMT-8, or "8 hours
> behind GMT". When it's 8 AM in San Diego, then it's 4 PM in London. This is
> what the ISO specifies. In my experience, this is what I see when people
> want to use time zones.
> * Going west is positive. This reflects the "amount of time that needs to
> be added to the local time to get to GMT. In this scheme, San Diego is
> GMT+8. This is what Posix specifies.
> Boost.DateTime has a call named posix_time_zone


> but it implements ISO time
> zone semantics.
> I asked Jeff Garland about this a while back, and he was horrified at the
> idea of breaking everyone's code for this. His response was "Change the
> docs, don't break code"

Thing is, the function have POSIX in its name, so POSIX semantics is
implied. Maybe we should create a new function and deprecate
to_posix_string? The new function could take an argument to select the
desired behavior.

Boost-Maint list run by bdawes at acm dot org