[cmake-developers] patch for cmake that adds a new timestamp command

[David Cole]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Nils Gladitz <gladitz at sci-vis.de> wrote:

> Why is TIMESTAMP misleading?
>
> Per default it currently outputs year, month, day, hour, minute and second.
> This includes both a date (a day on a calendar) as well as time (time of
> day).
>
> "Timestamp" I'd define as both date and time bound to an event (here the
> call or the (sub-)command).
>
> "Date" I'd consider inaccurate since it implies that there is no time
> resolution.
>
> "Time" I'd say would be slightly more accurate since it has higher
> precision and it matches the naming in C (time_t, tm, strftime ...).
>
> "DateTime" Is accurate and has precedence (e.g. SQL) but is (IMO) not as
> pretty.
>
> To list them in order of personal preference this would for me give:
> Timestamp, DateTime, Time, Date
>
> Nils
>
>
>
> On 09/27/2012 07:41 PM, Eric Noulard wrote:
>
>> 2012/9/27 David Cole <david.cole at kitware.com>:
>>
>>> Hmmmm. Good idea.
>>>
>>> Should we add a new command for this? Or should it be a sub-command of
>>> "string(" like RANDOM is?
>>>
>>> And... while we're at it, I've always thought we should add the
>>> ability to get the creation/modified/access times from a file via the
>>> CMake file command. If we allow getting the "current" time, we should
>>> leverage some of the same transformation-to-string code in the file
>>> command to get the various times associated with a file.
>>>
>>> What do other devs here think:
>>> New command or string sub-command for this functionality?
>>>
>> string sub-command for me, and agreed with Brad as well
>> for the "namespace" thing.
>>
>> agreed with file(...) extension as well.
>>
>> that said isn't the "TIMESTAMP" misleading?
>> shouldn't it be called "DATE" instead?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Nils Gladitz, B.Sc.
> DICOM, Konnektivität und Entwicklung
>
> Scivis wissenschaftliche Bildverarbeitung GmbH
> Bertha-von-Suttner-Str. 5
> D-37085 Göttingen
> GERMANY
> Handelsregister Nr. / Trade Register No. B3100 Göttingen
> Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors Dr. Gernot Ebel, Dr. Uwe Engeland
>
> Tel: 0049 (0)551 634181-28
> E-Mail: gladitz at scivis.de
> Web: www.scivis.de
>
> --
>
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/**
> opensource/opensource.html<http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html>
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
> http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/**CMake_FAQ<http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ>
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-**developers<http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers>
>


I agree with Nils here. I like Timestamp or DateTime best since it has
resolution down to (at least) the second.

Nils, we do not have a formal definition of coding style written out
anywhere.

To summarize our expectations briefly, though, I'd say this:

When modifying existing files, try to blend in with the existing style.
When editing C++ source or header files, keep line length under 80
characters per line. When adding a new file, copy the style from another
file nearby. With *.cmake files, please use lowercase commands. When
defining functions or macros in the CMake language, use "${FileName}_" as a
prefix for functions defined in a *.cmake file, where FileName.cmake is the
name of the containing file.

And ask questions here if there's anything that's unclear.

Thanks,
David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake-developers/attachments/20120928/dd2ad4fb/attachment.html>