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 #174112 is a reply to message #174107]

Sun, 22 May 2011 04:28

Jeff North
Messages: 58
Registered: November 2010

Karma:

Member

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:

> | On 5/21/2011 12:08 PM, Jeff North wrote:
> | > On Sat, 21 May 2011 10:32:20 -0400, in comp.lang.php Jerry Stuckle
> | > <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net>
> | > <ir8idn$ojm$1(at)dont-email(dot)me> wrote:
> | >

[snip]

> | > 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.

[snip]

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

> | >> |>> | 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 not matter how you try to spin it. If you
are going to speak with the voice of authority then get your facts
correct first.

> | 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?

> | 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."

[snip]
-- -----------------------------------------------------------
"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.
-- -----------------------------------------------------------

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: Sun Nov 24 18:46:56 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05140 seconds