4 ms·
I don't get the argument that timestaps are not human readable -- they are, the only thing you need is a good viewing software. And yes, it is worth it since at
by mbq 14y ago
I don't get the argument that timestaps are not human readable -- they are, the only thing you need is a good viewing software. And yes, it is worth it since at least 99.999999% of accesses to this data come from machines.
- Keithamus 14y agoTo paraphrase your own comment: Timestamps are human readable. You just need a machine to change them into a human readable format
- mbq 14y agoI was trying to say that it is better to invest a bit of time in improving data viewers/editors to present timestamps in a nice form than to waste huge amount of effort on parsing and serializing stuff no human will ever see. Besides, human readable is a relative term -- even ASCII text requires serious machine processing to become human readable pixel pattern.
- tomelders 14y agoThey're certainly not human readable, but I want to know who these people are that are reading the date times being passed around by two pieces of software. Also, why are people passing around date times for specific timezones? Converting a UTC timestamp to local time is trivial in every language I've used. Converting a local time to another local time isn't. It sounds to me like a problem that doesn't exist, and a solution that causes more problems. I'll be sticking with unix timestamps thank you very much.