Re: [Stellarium-pubdevel] some design questions and notes on dates

[Matthew G. <mat...@gm...>]

On Sunday 02 March 2008, Nigel Kerr wrote:
> 2. right now the ISO strings the qvalidator subclass understand can
> have a year 0.  i think i recall that's what we settled on.  The user
> can enter, and will see, a year zero, and our calculations *do not*
> assume that the year -1 needs to be incremented to be correct.

We had a few questions/bug reports about having a year 0.  I made a section 
in the FAQ (last entry at present) which describes the 0.9.1 date 
behaviour, and seems like a good method to use for the future, although I 
don't know if that is the official plan.


> 3. StelUtils is a real rogue's gallery of date functions some pre-qt, 
> some using QDateTime with its limitations.  i think as part of this
> work, i clean up and/or do away with old ones, yes?  At least any
> function that uses QDateTime to get to or from a jd needs attention.

"rogue's gallery" hehe. I agree to remove std::string and std::wstring 
versions of functions which take string parameters.   I don't know about 
the data dna time stuff yet - I only ever examined these features from the 
user's point of view - I did not look at the code in any detail.


Matthew