Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #1761

Re: problem saving date fields

Followups directed to: comp.lang.php

Show all headers | View raw

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@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I said I was aiming at your stupidity, not your brain.
> 
> "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.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

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 11:38 -0700
  Re: problem saving date fields Luuk <Luuk@invalid.lan> - 2011-05-20 20:50 +0200
  Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-21 08:58 +1000
    Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-20 22:35 -0400
      Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-21 13:13 +1000
        Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 23:47 -0700
          Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-21 00:18 -0700
            Re: problem saving date fields Luuk <Luuk@invalid.lan> - 2011-05-21 09:54 +0200
            Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-21 10:37 -0400
              Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-21 08:07 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-21 19:55 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 14:20 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 17:28 -0400
        Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-21 10:32 -0400
          Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-22 02:08 +1000
            Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-21 20:01 -0400
              Re: problem saving date fields "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> - 2011-05-21 20:30 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-21 23:13 -0400
              Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-22 14:28 +1000
                Re: problem saving date fields Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-05-22 12:45 +0200
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 08:26 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> - 2011-05-22 09:20 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-23 00:08 +1000
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 13:47 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Bill B <me@privacy.net> - 2011-05-22 14:17 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 14:26 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Bill B <me@privacy.net> - 2011-05-22 16:27 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-23 09:01 +1000
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 20:21 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Bill B <me@privacy.net> - 2011-05-22 21:36 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 21:46 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-23 12:20 +1000
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-22 22:30 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 21:51 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-23 07:13 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 10:18 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 10:27 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-23 14:16 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 12:17 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-23 18:00 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 22:30 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-24 05:45 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 02:10 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-26 05:43 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Co <vonclausowitz@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 14:26 -0700
                Re: problem saving date fields Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-05-23 18:01 -0400
                Re: problem saving date fields Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-05-23 23:59 +0200
                Re: problem saving date fields "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> - 2011-05-22 09:11 -0400

csiph-web