Time Conversion

> > Did you consider String concatenation if the

> "time"

> > you have is nothing but yet another

> semicolon-divided

> > String?

>

> That really doesn't seem a very good idea.

It does to me though I would do it with String.replaceAll().

sabre150a at 2007-7-12 20:25:50 >

Anyway here are the codes.

import java.text.SimpleDateFormat;

public class Test{

public static void main(String[] args)throws Exception{

SimpleDateFormat in = new SimpleDateFormat("HH:mm");

SimpleDateFormat out = new SimpleDateFormat("H'hrs'mm'min'");

String[] tests = {"06:20","17:45","0:83"};

for(int i=0;i<tests.length;i++){

System.out.println(out.format(in.parse(tests[i])));

}

}

}

>

cotton.ma at 2007-7-12 20:25:50 >

> > Would one of you care to explain why that would be

> a

> > better solution then SimpleDateFormat?

>

> The solution is the simplest that fits the current

> requirements, which is String manipulation.

How is that easier again then what I posted?

One less line of code?

cotton.ma at 2007-7-12 20:25:50 >

> > > Would one of you care to explain why that would

> be

> > a

> > > better solution then SimpleDateFormat?

> >

> > The solution is the simplest that fits the current

> > requirements, which is String manipulation.

>

> Agreed. SDF is proposed as the answer to ALL time and

> date formatting problems but it does not deal well

> with values outside the normal ranges (i.e. 63

> minutes) and it distorts values of time when dealing

> with a number of seconds or milliseconds that cross

> leap second and year boundaries.

This is rubbish, SDF does no such thing. Calendar and date are doing that and while that may seem pedantic to you it seems a pretty important point to me.

We do not know what the requirements of the OP are really, and we are probably unlikely to know. There are several reasons, which I gave, as to why SDF is the solution to choose, in my opinion.

As to the points the two of you have made:

- the point about distortion is convoluted although maybe perhaps valid. but only valid if it violates the OP's requirements which we do not know

- the point about simple is rubbish

Regexes are not the answer to every problem in life or Java. Especially when a pre-existing, well tested, well understood later by other programmers looking at the code solution exists.

cotton.ma at 2007-7-21 22:41:41 >

<snip>

> This is rubbish, SDF does no such thing. Calendar

> and date are doing that and while that may seem

> pedantic to you it seems a pretty important point to

> me.

Not rubbish! Not pedantic!

>

> We do not know what the requirements of the OP are

Agreed - which, unlike you, is why in my first post I did not propose a solution.

> really, and we are probably unlikely to know. There

> are several reasons, which I gave, as to why SDF is

> the solution to choose, in my opinion.

Your opinion.

>

> As to the points the two of you have made:

>

> - the point about distortion is convoluted although

> maybe perhaps valid. but only valid if it violates

> the OP's requirements which we do not know

> - the point about simple is rubbish

Not rubbish.

>

> Regexes are not the answer to every problem in life

> or Java.

Horses for courses. I proposed regex partly to offset the rush towards SDF though I could equally well have proposed a 'substring' approach.

> Especially when a pre-existing, well tested,

> well understood later by other programmers looking at

> the code solution exists.

I see more potential problems to the use of SDF than I do to using regex or substring.

sabre150a at 2007-7-21 22:41:41 >

> > > As to the points the two of you have made:

> > >

> > > - the point about distortion is convoluted

> > although

> > > maybe perhaps valid. but only valid if it

> violates

> > > the OP's requirements which we do not know

> > > - the point about simple is rubbish

> >

> > Not rubbish.

>

> Because why exactly?

As a counter - why do you say it is rubbish? Exactly what aspect of my earlier statements do you think is rubbish?

>

> > > Especially when a pre-existing, well tested,

> > > well understood later by other programmers

> looking

> > at

> > > the code solution exists.

> >

> > I see more potential problems to the use of SDF

> than

> > I do to using regex or substring.

>

> That is primarily because you are biased towards

> regexes.

No really true - I am biased towards regex for problems involving string manipulation. You view the OPs problem as date conversion problem, I view it as a string manipulation.

>

> At any rate I am willing to concede about, as you

> phrased it, distortion, might be an issue in some

> cases. But the simplicty argument is rubbish, I'm

> sorry but it is.

I'm not sure I understand this? The simplicity argument is primarily yours. I have to go out now to help someone move house but I will re-read the 'simplicty' arguments later and get back.

sabre150a at 2007-7-21 22:41:41 >