strtotm

[Guy Harris]

> strptime() [at least] falls into this category -- I believed Guy intended
> it as the inverse of strptime() [or at least as close as you can get].

"Inverse of 'strftime()'".  Yes, that was the basic idea.

It does take a format parameter; however, it hasn't any magic way of
figuring out whether 1/2/92 is January 2, 1992 or February 1, 1992 - you
have to tell it how to interpret dates such as that, by passing it the
right format string.