3 ms·
> 02019 Why not 002019? 6 digits. That would be valid a lot longer.
by collinmanderson 2y ago
> 02019
Why not 002019? 6 digits. That would be valid a lot longer.
- kragen 2y agoi wholeheartedly support your choice to henceforth format your years with six digits
- collinmanderson 2y agoI'm waiting for python support first. Not sure what the eta is or why it's taking so long. Every day we get closer to the eventual deadline. > Extended date representations are not currently supported (±YYYYYY-MM-DD). https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.date.fromisoformat https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.dat... > MAXYEAR is 9999. https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.MAXYEAR https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.MAX... I'm also waiting for longnow.org to start using long dates behind the scenes, like image urls, html metadata, http headers, etc. They need to eat their own dog food as far as software goes. <link rel="icon" href="https://static.longnow.org/2022/06/favicon.png" type="image/png"> <meta property="og:image" content="https://static.longnow.org/2021/10/header-talks.jpg"> <meta property="article:modified_time" content="2024-06-11T17:21:23.000Z">