Re: policy around 'wontfix' bug tag

[<tomas@tuxteam.de>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 08:22:23AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:

[...]

> But a better parser would allow the same functionality, without
> being          confusing, inconsistent, and hard to maintain. So
> yes, I'll stand by           "complete misfeature".

While we do agree that datetime input formats are, at times,
ambiguous and generally a mess, generic datetime parsing
functionality *is* useful, and *can* be done (albeit sometimes
needing some recourse to "ambient information", which might
be provided by locale, e.g.).

Thus I do agree with your statement "it's messy", less so
with "it's useless" or "can't be done".

PostgreSQL[1] gives a good working example of an implementation
which is useful.

But since `date' has to cater for backward compatibility, the
constraints are harder, I agree.

Cheers

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/datatype-datetime.html#DATATYPE-DATETIME-INPUT
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlp3DdcACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYVkACdGVS1KtyDauTFi4S/tA97P6WG
VIcAoIBuVtnGSURj7v7yho6aF1wmVCTE
=WAbh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----