On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:59:59 -0400, Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> wrote:
The amount of work in decoding an integer (say a UNIX-style time_t) to a
date is approximately equal to the amount of work in parsing a RFC822
style date, and it's at least as easy to botch up the decoder as to
botch the RFC 822 date parser.
I beg to differ. As a little test, it would be interesting to see how many
of the mail-clients we use are able to parse the Date:-header in this
message, which as far as I can tell is perfectly legal according to
RFC2822.
(I know the mail client I am working on fails to parse it. Anyone get
their client to display 20040429 151030UTC? (Or 20040430 151030UTC, I am
actually not sure how to correctly parse timezones >2359)
--
Frode Gill