5 ms·
Truly a bizzare argument that only gets harder to understand every time I hear it. Whether the day, month or year is most important changes per every case. Are
by tidenly 4y ago
Truly a bizzare argument that only gets harder to understand every time I hear it. Whether the day, month or year is most important changes per every case.
Are you telling me if you had file cabinets for the last 50 years, and you had to get a specific file Nov 1992, you would rather sort first and get all the files marked "November", and then sort through those 50 to get to the 1992 November? Surely one would reduce down to the year - 1992 - first, and then to the month.
Same for alphabetical ordering, a data list ordered by logname-MMDDYYYY.log alphabetically wouldnt be chronological order - YYYYMMDD or DDMMYYYY would.
Month is primary in some cases sure, but I think year and day endian are primary in many others - plus have the above sorting and ordering benefits.
- bmitc 4y agoTo be clear, I said > each of the various permutations do have their use cases where they shine
- emn13 4y agoAs others have said, it's the middle-endianness itself which is weird. Also, if you're going to write the whole date anyhow, I don't think it makes a huge amount of sense to describe any part of it as "more important" to the extent that it deserves re-ordering a date. The evolution of the US ordering feels (I might be wrong!) similar to how spoken numbers are little endian from 11 to 19, yet big endian from 21 to 99. Some languages are even worse in this regard; but regardless, they're unhelpful historical artifacts that we learn to live with, not actually helpful, well-thought-out, or even merely irrelevant. Notably there are considerable differences between how quickly children learn maths in different languages, and digit ordering may contribute (of course other cultural factors may contribute too). I wouldn't be surprised if date ordering too is similarly a small but real drag on learning.