From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from duke.felloff.net ([216.126.196.34]) by ewsd; Tue Dec 10 14:17:35 EST 2019
Message-ID: <241E176E19E4EE22ACD22FDCCFAA6E31@felloff.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 20:17:25 +0100
From: cinap_lenrek@felloff.net
To: 9front@9front.org
Subject: Re: [9front] date -t vs rfc3339 i which is correct:
In-Reply-To: 14D90BE78DD6FC8C05C78941DB9D6103@ewsd.inri.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: patented full-stack-oriented hardware template 

my interpretation is that this rfc3339 is a SUBSET of iso-8601 and we
hit edge case in iso-8601 that is outside of rfc3339. we'r correct
for iso 8601 but not for rfc3339. i think this should be changed
so we cover both specifications and make date -t more widely usefull.

--- a/sys/src/cmd/date.c	Mon Dec 09 18:08:02 2019 +0100
+++ b/sys/src/cmd/date.c	Tue Dec 10 20:15:42 2019 +0100
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
 char*
 isodate(Tm *t)
 {
-	static char c[25]; /* leave room to append isotime */
+	static char c[26]; /* leave room to append isotime */
 	snprint(c, 11, "%04d-%02d-%02d", 
 		t->year + 1900, t->mon + 1, t->mday);
 	return c;
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@
 			c[9] = '-';
 			tz = -tz;
 		}
-		snprint(c+10, 5, "%02d%02d", tz / 60, tz % 60);
+		snprint(c+10, 6, "%02d:%02d", tz / 60, tz % 60);
 	} else {
 		c[9] = 'Z';
 		c[10] = 0;

--
cinap