[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-edu-devel
Subject:    Re: [kde-edu]: [RFC] removing ExtDate
From:       Pino Toscano <toscano.pino () tiscali ! it>
Date:       2007-06-26 22:02:16
Message-ID: 200706270002.21006.toscano.pino () tiscali ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


What an old thread not really ended :)

> Since Qt 4.x, QDate now allows dates over a much wider range of years
> (-4713 to 11,000,000 rather than 1582 to 8000).  Because of this, it could
> be argued that there is no longer a need for ExtDate, although it does
> provide for a different range of years that extends further into the past
> (-50,000 to 50,000).
>
> Is there any reason to keep ExtDate?

The real reason is (IMHO): is there any real need for date ranges wider than 
what QDate provides, in applications than KStars?

> In KStars, I actually derive my own 
> KStarsDateTime class that adds some astronomy-specific things, so I'd be
> prefectly happy adding the ability to use dates prior to -4713 to
> KStarsDateTime, and using KDateTime as my baseclass instead of ExtDateTime.

If you think you can provide a local replacement with no real issue, that's 
fine I'd say.

> A quick look at lxr.kde.org shows that only KStars and Kst are using
> ExtDateTime, so I'm especially interested in hearing from kst developers.
> Although, it looks like they've forked their own version of ExtDateTime, so
> maybe they don't care what we do in libkdeedu :)

Right, so this makes KStars the only actual user of ExtDateTime.

-- 
Pino Toscano

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
kde-edu mailing list
kde-edu@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-edu


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]