[tz] [PROPOSED] Support SAVE suffixes, for Namibia 1994-2017
eggert at cs.ucla.edu
Mon Apr 9 02:17:15 UTC 2018
Michael Deckers via tz wrote:
> Considering that this proposal makes the setting of the dst bit
> an issue that is independent from the circumstance of whether
> the value of a SAVE entry is zero or not, is it not
> desirable to completely avoid the use of negative SAVE values
> to express the dst bit setting, so as to make it easier for
> parsers of zic source files to follow the changes
> in the "bleeding edge" format?
It's more the other way around, I would think. zic has supported negative SAVE
values for decades and most other tzdata parsers have followed suit. So if a
timekeeping practice can be specified either way, it'll be easier on the
installed base if we use this long-established feature than if we use the
proposed new feature.
I get the point that we'd rather keep the syntax simpler and more regular, and
that lessening the number of syntax features helps do that. But here I think the
compatibility win outweighs the regularity loss.
> for systematicness, shouldn't the same suffixes and defaults
> also be applicable to a numeric entry in the RULE column of
> ZONE lines?
Good point, thanks. Proposed further patch attached.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5370 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the tz