• Derp (unregistered)


  • MacFrog (unregistered)


  • MacFrog (unregistered) in reply to Derp

    Okay. 32nd!

  • Tim (unregistered)

    Very ironic that I hit a problem like this only yesterday, with a test I had just written. My problem was slightly different though in that the test was dependent on the current timezone. Unfortunately it seems that in C# it's not possible to isolate your unit tests code from the current time zone because it's a machine-global setting.

  • Quite (unregistered) in reply to Tim

    Very ironic that in American, "ironic" seems to mean "coincidental".

  • Ulli (unregistered)

    Had a similar issue: Delete everything older than one year:

    new DateTime(DateTime.Today.Year-1, DateTime.Today.Month, DateTime.Today.Day) was executed on Feb 29th...

  • (nodebb)

    Pfft. That code would work fine.

    In Sweden.

    In 1712.


  • cleese_pls (unregistered) in reply to Quite


  • P (unregistered)

    It has always been said on this site that if you roll your own date/time library you will screw up. Here's proof that even if you use the built in libraries there's no guarantee that you won't mess it up as well!

  • cleese_pls (unregistered)

    Done !!!


  • (nodebb)

    @Steve_The_Cynic but I thought they only had C and Algol in those days?

    @cleese_pls those links don't work for the rest of us.

  • BernieTheBernie (unregistered)

    No. That programmer was from Persia. And he was used to the superior Persian calendar. Months have either 30 or 31 days (31 during summer, 30 during winter). Only the stupid Western countries don't want to use it...

  • Derp (unregistered) in reply to jkshapiro

    I suspect @cleese_pls is a spambot.

  • 2 days from tomorrow's yesterday (unregistered) in reply to P

    Dates are hard.

  • Mike Kellogg (google) in reply to Quite

    Yep! It's even in the dictionary!


    It's almost like languages are constantly evolving as culture changes! Crazy thought, huh? Best not to be podsnappery about it, though. :)

  • cleese_pls (unregistered)



  • Carl Witthoft (google) in reply to 2 days from tomorrow's yesterday
    Dates are hard.
    That's what she said.
  • cleese_pls (unregistered)

    One last time:


    Keep it going guys, take it all the way!


  • cleese_pls (unregistered)

    Send it to

    @mike judge !!! @ closing ceremonies

    see what happens !!!

  • The Moderation (unregistered) in reply to cleese_pls

    Hello please stop posting on our forums or we wil ban u k/

  • spaceman (unregistered)



  • I Am A Robot (unregistered)

    Me: Hey Steve, what dates does your boss want for Period Start, Billing Date, and Created Date?

    Steve: He says 1st, 15th, and 30th?

    Me: But how about February?

    Steve: You know what he's like, he's going to give you one answer and questioning him about it is going to get a complaint to your ma

  • Alchemist (unregistered) in reply to jkshapiro

    @jkshapiro If the Ancient Egyptians had computer programming, would it be "Ra's Algol"? (Really really bad DC comics pun.)

  • spaceman (unregistered)

    just keep it going

    Post original article please

    then read this!


  • Jeremy Hannon (google) in reply to Carl Witthoft

    Just because we have an article about Dates on Valentine's Day, doesn't mean you need to rub it in.

  • Jeremy Hannon (google)

    So, what is the "best" way to get the last day of the month? Using .Net date libraries, I typically get the first day of the following month and subtract one -- .AddDays(-1). Of course, that is assuming all of the localization setting are correct for the calendar I am supposed to be working in. Fortunately, I have yet to work with a non-Gregorian calendar.

  • Object delete. (unregistered) in reply to Mike Kellogg

    Sounds like an oxymoron: "constantly evolving". Is language constant or evolving? How can it be both at the same time? A previous version of language had "continously" at that place.

  • Kalikur (unregistered) in reply to Tim

    If you ever need current system date, timezone, whatever then you should use an injected service that gets it for you. Then you unit test config just passes in a static value and these kind of shenanigans never happen

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Mike Kellogg
    It's almost like languages are constantly evolving

    That's not evolving. That's devolving. And it should be resisted vehemently.

  • Joe (unregistered)

    don't touch willie

  • Mike Kellogg (google) in reply to Anon

    I'm afraid "evolution" has no implication of an objective improvement, only a gradual change over time. In whatever way you could call a change to language "objectively better" in the first place. :)

  • AlsoAnon (unregistered) in reply to Mike Kellogg

    That notion of "evolution" meaning "any gradual change over time" is itself a devolution of language. You can tell, because it results in a reduction of accurate communication by obviating the word "devolution", a perfectly cromulent word.

  • spaceman (unregistered)

    The BOOKS:




  • spaceman (unregistered)


  • spaceman (unregistered)


  • Mike Kellogg (google) in reply to AlsoAnon

    Well I certainly appreciate your use of the word cromulent ("appearing legitimate but actually being spurious") to describe the word "devolution," since your intended meaning when you say devolution just has it be a different word for "degeneration." :)

  • spaceman (unregistered)

    Two medals One Hole!

    Two medals One Hole!




    please put an end to all human suffering by ending the nuclear war aimed inward. Start your own nuclear war on your eye, to heal the mind, then heal the hurt.

    Because . . .

    All bodies are heavenly

    And heaven can be found in all bodies

  • (nodebb) in reply to P

    Real programmers can mess up in any language.

  • (nodebb) in reply to Alchemist

    iirc, the ancient Egyptians had years of 12 months of 30 days each, and 5 (or 6) days which didn't belong to the year (and thus wouldn't have to be included into a calendar). Adapting to this would make handling dates much simpler.

  • Dave (unregistered) in reply to Object delete.

    'Constant' literally means something like 'standing firm' or 'steadfast'. 'Steadfastly' is a perfectly cromulent alternative to 'continuously'.

  • Dave (unregistered) in reply to Object delete.

    'Constant' literally means something like 'standing firm' or 'steadfast'. 'Steadfastly' is a perfectly cromulent alternative to 'continuously'.

  • Mike Kellogg (google) in reply to Object delete.

    Sounds like an oxymoron: "constantly evolving". Is language constant or evolving? How can it be both at the same time?

    Missed this before. Sounds like you're purposely misinterpreting what I'm saying to try to make a point. :) "Constantly" is an adverb, modifying the verb "evolving," not "language." i.e. I said the fact that language is evolving is what's constant, not the language itself.

  • Wheresthespamohthereitis (unregistered)

    cleese_pls and spaceman are spammers. Probably the same one. And not even a "Report spam"-button...

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Mike Kellogg

    Yet he is still right that modifier should have been continuously, not constantly.

    Constant is, by definition, something that does not change. and as such it should not be used to describe change.

    What you said is “unchanging change”.

    You might be a fan of this “new and improved” (sic) language use but that doesn’t make it ok.

  • spaceman (unregistered)



  • Popsicle (unregistered)

    Wait... This (.net?) doesn't have a built in way to get the last day of the month given a known year and month?

  • Chris (unregistered)

    You can have constant acceleration. That means the velocity is changing, but at a rate that is constant.

    Constantly changing language means language that is always changing.

    As for a way to qualify if a change to language is positive or negative: language is for communication. If a change to the language makes the communication of ideas and information more efficient and clear (i.e. less misunderstandings), then it is positive. If you can give me a sentence that makes grammar nazis go nuts, but I instantly understood you perfectly, you have communicated well.

  • Yazeran (unregistered) in reply to PWolff

    Yep, the old Egyptian calendar was easy (apart from those 5 days which was not in the calendar).

    What was not so easy was that they did not account for leap years and stuck to the calendar for so long that it actually got a whole year out of sync.

    Yes their version of 'January 1st' slowly walked backwards a whole year in the cause of some 1500 years, and it did this several times!

    But at least they did not have to worry about a month having one day more once in a while... ;-)

  • wildcat (unregistered)

    I always take the 30th-31st of Feb off... it's my personal time.

  • (nodebb) in reply to Chris

    It's not grammar, it's vocabulary.

    Words have accreted meanings, and you use words in ignorance of those meanings at your peril. Or at the peril of anyone who thinks they understood what you meant, but because you used the wrong words they actually thought you meant something else and went away not understanding what you said at all. (Like did you actually check that they understood perfectly? Or did you just ask them if they understood and they said that they did?) Of course, maybe you used the word perfectly correctly, but the person you were talking to thought it meant something else ("inflammable"? that means "not flammable", right?) That's on them. They have a case for misunderstanding if they can point to other people misusing the word, but do you want to enable that?

    Now there's glory for you!

Leave a comment on “All the Rest Have Thirty One…”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article