FUDforum: comp.lang.php » problem saving date fields

Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » problem saving date fields

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: problem saving date fields [message #174143 is a reply to message #174140]

Mon, 23 May 2011 02:20

Jeff North
Messages: 58
Registered: November 2010

Karma:

Member

On Sun, 22 May 2011 20:21:14 -0400, in comp.lang.php Jerry Stuckle
<jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net>
<irc99s$50v$1(at)dont-email(dot)me> wrote:

> | On 5/22/2011 7:01 PM, Jeff North wrote:
> | > On Sun, 22 May 2011 13:47:29 -0400, in comp.lang.php Jerry Stuckle
> | > <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net>
> | > <irbi7i$gqk$2(at)dont-email(dot)me> wrote:
> | >
> | >> | On 5/22/2011 10:08 AM, Jeff North wrote:
> | >> |> On Sun, 22 May 2011 08:26:48 -0400, in comp.lang.php Jerry Stuckle
> | >> |> <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net>
> | >> |> <irave9$qdq$1(at)dont-email(dot)me> wrote:
> | >> |>
> | >> |>> | On 5/22/2011 12:28 AM, Jeff North wrote:
> | >> |>> |> On Sat, 21 May 2011 20:01:17 -0400, in comp.lang.php Jerry Stuckle
> | >> |>> |> <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net>
> | >> |>> |> <ir9jom$663$1(at)dont-email(dot)me> wrote:
> | >> |>
> | >> |> [snip]
> | >> |>
> | >> |>> |> 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."
> | >> |>> |
> | >> |>> | Which RFC is that?
> | >> |>
> | >> |> Have a look at the hyperlink provided but incase you can't read
> | >> |> hyperlinks it is RFC 3676 - the one that YOU provided - remember?
> | >> |>
> | >> |>> |> Now where does it state "It needs to be exactly
> | >> |>> |> hyphen-hyphen-space-newline."
> | >> |>> |
> | >> |>> | In the RFC. But you can't read either, so we also know you are an idiot.
> | >> |>
> | >> |> Which RFC is that - it isn't in the one you provided (3676 or 3736).
> | >> |> Care to provide another RFC?
> | >> |
> | >> | 3767. Learn to read, idiot. But we already know that is beyond your
> | >> | limited capabilities.
> | >
> | > First it was 3736, then 3676 and on the third attempt we have 3767!!!
> | >
> | > What on earth has "Securely Available Credentials Protocol" got to do
> | > with the signature line format?
> |
> | What an idiot. Sure, it was a typo. It's 3676,

IOW your full of crap.

> | but it really doesn't
> | make any difference anyway, because the rfc has words of more than one
> | syllable, so you can't understand it, anyway.
> |
> | Once again you prove what an idiot you are. Can't even learn to google
> | for yourself.
> |
> | Does your mommy read books to you? And maybe even these usenet posts?

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		problem saving date fields By: Co on Fri, 20 May 2011 18:38
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Fri, 20 May 2011 18:50
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Fri, 20 May 2011 21:00
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Fri, 20 May 2011 22:24
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Fri, 20 May 2011 22:52
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 21 May 2011 02:30
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 07:57
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 08:34
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 09:29
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 12:12
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 13:46
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 14:02
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 14:09
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 14:34
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Fri, 20 May 2011 22:58
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 21 May 2011 02:35
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Sat, 21 May 2011 03:13
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 06:47
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 07:18
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Luuk on Sat, 21 May 2011 07:54
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 21 May 2011 14:37
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sat, 21 May 2011 15:07
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 21 May 2011 23:55
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Sun, 22 May 2011 21:20
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 21:28
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 21 May 2011 14:32
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Sat, 21 May 2011 16:08
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 00:01
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Twayne on Sun, 22 May 2011 00:30
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 03:13
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Sun, 22 May 2011 04:28
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sun, 22 May 2011 10:45
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 12:26
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Twayne on Sun, 22 May 2011 13:20
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Sun, 22 May 2011 14:08
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 17:47
		Re: problem saving date fields By: me on Sun, 22 May 2011 18:17
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 22 May 2011 18:26
		Re: problem saving date fields By: me on Sun, 22 May 2011 20:27
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Sun, 22 May 2011 23:01
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 00:21
		Re: problem saving date fields By: me on Mon, 23 May 2011 01:36
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 01:46
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jeff North on Mon, 23 May 2011 02:20
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 02:30
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Mon, 23 May 2011 04:51
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 11:13
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Mon, 23 May 2011 17:18
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Mon, 23 May 2011 17:27
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 18:16
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Mon, 23 May 2011 19:17
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 22:00
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Tue, 24 May 2011 05:30
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Tue, 24 May 2011 09:45
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Thu, 26 May 2011 09:10
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Thu, 26 May 2011 09:43
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Co on Mon, 23 May 2011 21:26
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 23 May 2011 22:01
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Mon, 23 May 2011 21:59
		Re: problem saving date fields By: Twayne on Sun, 22 May 2011 13:11

Previous Topic:	is dis da place?
Next Topic:	foreach in reverse

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

]

Current Time: Fri Sep 20 14:38:12 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05221 seconds