W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > March 2004

RE: [F&O] Underflow in date arithmetic

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 04:37:25 -0800
Message-ID: <EDB607C8AC991F40BE646533A1A673E8017A5E7E@RED-MSG-42.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Priscilla Walmsley" <priscilla@walmsley.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>

Hi Priscilla:
We agreed to add wording to clarify the intent of the paragraphs you
identified at the meeting of the joint WGs last week.  

All the best, Ashok

-----Original Message-----
From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Priscilla
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 4:47 AM
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Subject: [F&O] Underflow in date arithmetic

In section 9.1.1 (Limits and precision), F&O says:

"A processor that limits the number of digits in date and time datatype
representations may encounter overflow and underflow conditions when it
tries to execute the functions in 9.7 Adding and Subtracting Durations
dateTime, date and time. In these situations, the processor .must.
zero in case of underflow and .must. raise an error [overflow in
arithmetic] in case of overflow."
The last sentence seems to imply that the return value for the functions
should be a numeric value 0 in the case of underflow. But this seems
strange, since none of the functions/operators described in that section
return numeric values in any other case.  I would think you would want
the part of the time or duration that is causing underflow (e.g. the
of seconds) to be treated as zero.  
Priscilla Walmsley
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2004 07:37:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:18 UTC