FUDforum
Fast Uncompromising Discussions. FUDforum will get your users talking.
Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » problem saving date fields
Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: problem saving date fields [message #174113 is a reply to message #174112] Sun, 22 May 2011 10:45 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Thomas 'PointedEars' is currently offline  Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma:
Senior Member
Jeff North wrote:

[attribution novels trimmed, quotation prefixes fixed, see
<http://learn.to/quote>]

> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 5/21/2011 12:08 PM, Jeff North wrote:
>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> There is no need to have variables in the code that aren't being used.
>> Yes, there is. In fact, it is quite common to have variables in the
>> code which are not being use *at this time*. And very good reasons for
>> *not* initializing them - as a *programmer* would know.
>
> Programmers who know more that just PHP know that you are full of
> crap.

Please name one that is not you in order to substantiate your claim.
Further, please explain what this has to do with Jerry's statement.

>>>> > The SQL statement should be ok - it's the "When I change of them
>>>> > the other one gets set back to default: 00-00-0000" I'm
>>>> > considering.
>>>> The SQL statement is NOT ok. As he would find if he printed it out
>>>> as was suggested.
>>> If the SQL statement was not ok then the record wouldn't be updated.
>> Or the row (tables have ROWS, not RECORDS) is not being updated with the
>> correct data - which is the case here. But then a *programmer* would
>> understand that.
>
> A row, or record, would NOT be updated if the SQL statement is NOT ok

He did not debate that. He offered another possibility: the SQL statement
being syntactically correct but attempting to write different data than were
desired.

> - even a moron like you can understand that - oh you do that is why
> you chose to answer the question the way you did.

So no need for name-calling.

>>>> >> BTW - your sig separator is broken. It needs to be exactly
>>>> >> hyphen-hyphen-space-newline.
>
> [snip]
>
>>>> It has nothing to do with Thunderbird. It has EVERYTHING to do
>>>> with following usenet standards, in this case RFC 3736.
>>>
>>> Please highlight the line(s) from RFC 3736 that can back up your
>>> claim.
>>>
>>>> But I see you're as clueless about rfcs as you are programming.
>>> -- -------------------------------------------------
>>> The supplied code is for guideline purposes only.
>>
>> Typo - the rfc is 3676,
>
> 3676 and 3736 is NOT a typo

You cannot be sure about that. The Free Online Dictionary defines a typo as
follows:

,-<http://www.thefreedictionary.com/typo>
|
| Noun 1. typo - a mistake in printed matter resulting from mechanical
| failures of some kind
| Synonyms: erratum, literal, literal error, misprint, typographical
| error
| Related words: mistake, error - part of a statement that is not
| correct; "the book was full of errors"
|
| Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2008 Princeton
| University, Farlex Inc.

So it could very well have been a typo, either caused by mechanical keyboard
malfunction or mechanical confusion between the fingers of the (quick)
typist when using the keyboard.

>> which you could find if you knew how to do a simple google search.
>
> Everyone would know that they needed to search for "The Text/Plain
> Format and DelSp Parameters" to get to the relevant information that
> you got wrong in the first place - right?

It was a valid assumption. If you search on Google for "rfc 3736 usenet
signature" you will be presented with a hyperlink to the correct RFC (3676)
at the first position, thanks to Google's implicit error correction.

>> But that looks to be beyond your capability, also.
>
> http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3676.html#sec-4.3
> "There is a long-standing convention in Usenet news which also
> commonly appears in Internet mail of using "-- " as the separator line
> between the body and the signature of a message. When generating a
> Format=Flowed message containing a Usenet-style separator before the
> signature, the separator line is sent as-is."
>
> Now where does it state "It needs to be exactly
> hyphen-hyphen-space-newline."

A separator line needs to be ended with newline (<CR><LF> in Internet
messages, see RFC 5322, section 2.1) in order to separate the line that
precedes it from the line that follows it. The definition of a separator
line includes that no other characters than those stated, in the stated
order, can be part of the line for it to be (recognized as) a separator
line. (A separator is a thing that separates other things from one another,
and a seperator line is a line that is considered a separator.)

So

> [snip]
> -- -----------------------------------------------------------

this is _not_ a signature separator line, and

> "Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> I said I was aiming at your stupidity, not your brain.
>
> "Johnny" <wxpprofessional(at)msn(dot)com> writes:
> You missed. You can not hit a non-existent thing.

this is is not a properly delimited signature according to RFC 3676 (and
1855). It is also not a proper Usenet signature according to RFC 1855,
for with five lines it exceeds the recommended length of four lines by one.

> -- -----------------------------------------------------------

And this is a rather pointless string of characters because nothing follows
that would be separated from the preceding text.


PointedEars
--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: is dis da place?
Next Topic: foreach in reverse
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ]

Current Time: Fri Nov 22 20:23:23 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07245 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.1.3.
Copyright ©2001-2023 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software