1. 32
  1.  

  2. 9

    I’m a time/date nerd so didn’t expect to read anything new, but was pleasantly surprised.

    It’s clearly adapted from a talk though.

    Although I have one nit for this pun-laden infodump - no mention of week numbering? I’m sorry, but that’s just … week-sauce.

    1. 5

      Did it leave you yearning for more?

      1. 0

        I find an intake of info like biannually quite satisfactory, but sometimes a biennial schedule is sufficient.

      2. 3

        It’s clearly adapted from a talk though.

        It even says so:

        I’ve given this talk three times: at RubyConfIndia, RubyConf Australia, and Balkan Ruby. (Don’t worry, non-Rubyists; there’s no Ruby in this post. The conference topics were just happenstance. Also I love the word “happenstance”.)

        1. 0

          So it does… I read it over breakfast and spent way too much time constructing the we[e|a]k pun.

          1. 4

            Much to hour disappointment.

      3. 9

        I’m sure there is good content in this post, but I gave up looking for it after two minutes of scrolling through puns…

        1. 4

          It’s the style of the page that drives me away. I’d appreciate it a lot if it would just pick a colour scheme.

          And yeah, this is griping, but there’s some useful information buried in the showmanship here.

          1. 3

            Firefox Reader Mode is your friend.

          2. 2

            I had a lot of fun researching all this stuff when I was writing a book about working with time in PostgreSQL. It’s remarkably complicated.

            1. 1

              PG handles time really well. I was always pleasantly surprised.

              1. 2

                That’s how I would describe my experience with Postgres generally: more often pleasantly surprising than not. Its date/time/interval facilities are great.