Talk:Day of the week: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
:: The thing that bothered me about the removal was that it went from several examples showing at least a couple different approaches and coding styles to just one examples. That rather defeats Perl's TMTOWTDI philosophy, IMO. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 02:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |
:: The thing that bothered me about the removal was that it went from several examples showing at least a couple different approaches and coding styles to just one examples. That rather defeats Perl's TMTOWTDI philosophy, IMO. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 02:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
::: Maybe a mention of TMTOWTDI on RC's main Perl page and mention of its implications w.r.t. RC? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 04:26, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Also, DateTime is not a core module, so is inferior in many ways compared to the deleted example which uses Time::Local, which ''is'' a core module (i.e., included with Perl). --[[Special:Contributions/71.141.117.11|71.141.117.11]] 04:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |
Also, DateTime is not a core module, so is inferior in many ways compared to the deleted example which uses Time::Local, which ''is'' a core module (i.e., included with Perl). --[[Special:Contributions/71.141.117.11|71.141.117.11]] 04:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
: Seems like you have a reason to leave the Time::Local version in fully and just maybe mention the existence of DateTime?<br> P.S. I should mention that I am a reluctant Perl programmer --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 04:26, 31 July 2010 (UTC) |