[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: Default time for unmarked history lines

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: Fwd: Default time for unmarked history lines
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:21:45 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0

On 1/18/16 11:53 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:

> So, how about instead interpreting a missing/0 date as a NaD (Not A Date),
> rather as readline does anyway with time 0, and providing a slightly more
> meaningful message than the current "??". Then a) I would be able to remove
> all my bogus "1" timestamps, and b) both "0" and missing timestamps would
> give the user a clue that data was missing and/or zero?

I think that a more meaningful error string would be useful.  We'll try
reporting on invalid dates if the timestamp string in the history entry is

``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    address@hidden    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]