Re: [grepmail-devel] Grepmail patch to merge DP and DM

[Seth C. <se...@or...>]

At 12:57 PM 05/10/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>Hey Seth. This week is pretty busy, but I'll roll your changes in as soon as I
>can.

No rush.  I started it on a whim, put off other stuff to finish it (just 
cause I was enjoying do it) but really, it's not a big deal... functionally
it doesn't add anything new.

>  I think I need to get used to the idea of "auto-detecting" whether
>Date::Manip or Date::Parse needs to be used -- but I guess that's what we have
>to do.
>
>Hm... On second thought, maybe we should try to parse the date using
>Date::Parse, and then fall back on Date::Manip? Like this:
>
>unless ($parsed_date = Date::Parse::parsedate($opts{d}))

Will that work? I thought $opts(d) ends up being the complex
date not the individual dates....

Maybe I'm wrong.

>That way we could still support complex dates from the user, but the rest of
>the code can be a lot simpler. (That's because we can use Date::Parse
>internally all the time.) We can change our requirements from "either of
>Date::Manip or Date::Parse" to "Date::Parse, and optionally Date::Manip if you
>want complex dates".

sure that would work... I think....

I realized that I probably missed a few things to check for ("ago"?)
but that overall, it would work too.

Personally I'd make the Date::Manip the required one... It's slower
but it will work with anything.  Date::Parse is more limited but fast.
That's one reason I liked falling back on Manip, since regardless, I know 
if they have Manip installed, they can do anything.

Seth