Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: how do I get ampm format for time?

From: bobr:dprc at: 21-Jan-2001 5:22

At 12:40 PM 1/20/01 -0800, Jeff wrote:
> Howdy, Senator Racko: > > > #1) I consider that most of you overlooked a biggie. > > Likewise: > > Some of us (me) had no idea this was intended as a > Programming Challenge (way too busy to read the whole > thread), and was only paying attention when they noticed a > bug in some posted code.
I am grateful for the help. Yes, I see that early on in the thread the conversion happened to time! from the unspecified obj/time form. Looks to me like the olde gossip game (where noise introduced early on gets amplified) happens here too.
> Of course, it's best to always post code that you think is > well polished...
I see now where my own "polishing" may have broken my example!! (smile)
> A suggestion: Threads that are Programming Challenges should > put "[PROGRAMMING CHALLENGE]", or something like that, in > the subject line so I can avoid accidentally posting in > those threads. (-:
EEK! if you stop posting then many of us will not really learn from you. Every thread I post with "How do I" subject is designed to be saved for training others. in fact it seems we are on the anniversary of this thread-prefix ...
>I am activating this thread and others like it >with the same prfix to solve some real problems. >Likely someone (hint) will capture these for the knowledge base. > >What will follow on this thread set are >pieces of functionality I am taking advantage of >in some other language or some other real-world app. > >I code in lots of things. >You should expect to see stuff on this thread >in C, squeak, expect, python plus a few more >as I am the custodian of at least 2 other rare languages. ...1/18/00
Though I have to filter a lot of email that comes generally to the list, I keep filters on this prefix wide open and read them all. Sometimes the responses I get back are not appropriate. For several I have injected, there hasn't been much discussion stimulated. For this I blame myself but rather than pester, I have decided to actively-listen. I would rather deal with some crankyness or upset than ask questions on a prefix that nearly guarantees that the people who can make a difference about it will ignore it. They aren't all programming-challenges either since I have plenty of material to cover that deals with issues and conventions for which I believe there is not a pleasant programmable solution. Eye openers for people who design the language and its environment. For this ampm example I was able to start with a program that worked (maybe a bit quirky). I could tell when writing it that I could do better but I was already applying the best series of principles at my disposal. So, with an interest of becoming a better coder myself, I introduced it as a "make my code succinct" thread. Meanwhile something even deeper bothered me -- That there are many ways to incorrectly construct such a simple function. I was counting on the fact that in other areas, RT has put in their own code in subsequent releases to head off common errors before they bite someone. In addition I felt I could get the real advocates (those with time) to think about the deeper problem as a lead-in to an eye opener about refinements to basic types and how they evolve. If I start small with a real-world example I get even better attention. Among the things I was trying to stir up was discussion about how folks (inside or outside RT) decide what is a (possibly contributed) mezzanine function, what goes into a datatype-refinement and what gets left out altogether. That exact decision strategy is one I think others (outside of RT) would like to know so we can more appropriately pitch our suggestions. Of course I could infer one -- and after writing an elaborate paper about it discover that the answer is simply: "oh, Carl decides that! :)" which is only funny up to the point you start thinking about buying more Carl-insurance. Jeff, you have demonstrated great flexibility in adapting and understanding the snips posted which is to your credit. Yours was also the easiest to decouple into separate refinements. I am sorry you are so pressed for time to not be able to go back to the first thread in a series.