[geeklog-devel] Solution for Bug 0000853

[Stan Palatnik]

I agree you can write a function that's faster then strtotime(), but the
function is super flexible. Your checkdate() function will limit users to
entering syntacticly correct dates, while strtotime() will accept textual
dates as well.

And you're going to have to check that against the date of the database
entries anway, unless I'm missing something? The variable that holds the
timestamp should only be generated once, instead of generating the date
everytime you need it on the same script.



On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Ishesh Murarka <ishesh at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Stan Palatnik <yankees26an at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Yea I didn't account for alphanumeric input using ctype. In that case, if
>> the text field contains any letters it should be run through *strtotime*().
>> It's a very flexible built-in php function that can detect alot of mixed
>> dates. For example it detects "yesterday", " one week ago", June 10th 2008",
>> etc.
>>
>> The use of strtotime() would involve a lot of operations to convert from
> date to number of seconds elapsed and then checking that with the date
> (timestamp) on the database.
> I think a better fix is to write a good checkdate() function
>
> I've been working on this. I'm trying to add a few features like adding a
> pop-up calender there and having these checks done when a date is clicked.
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Dirk Haun <dirk at haun-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Stan Palatnik wrote:
>>>
>>> >The simplest fix is including checkdate() in both the start and end
>>> dates
>>> (...)
>>> >Another faster solution would be just to check if mkdate returns false
>>> >
>>> >                    $startdate = mktime(0,0,0,$DS[1],$DS[2],$DS[0]);
>>>
>>> Actually, when you crank up the error_reporting to E_ALL you already get
>>> an error for the mktime() call: "A non well formed numeric value
>>> encountered".
>>>
>>> I think the first thing we should be checking for is that the $DS and
>>> $DE arrays both have exactly 3 elements. And if the user mixed in some
>>> letters, both checkdate() and mktime() will barf again, so we may want
>>> to cast the 3 elements to (int) when calling any of those functions.
>>>
>>> Apart from that technicality, the real problem here is that this code
>>> exists in pretty much every plugin out there that implemented the search
>>> function ... And it doesn't look like the new search in 1.6.0 would
>>> change anything here. Sami?
>>>
>>> bye, Dirk
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.geeklog.net/
>>> http://geeklog.info/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> geeklog-devel mailing list
>>> geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
>>> http://eight.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Stanislav
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geeklog-devel mailing list
>> geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
>> http://eight.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ishesh Murarka
>
> _______________________________________________
> geeklog-devel mailing list
> geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net
> http://eight.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/geeklog-devel
>
>


-- 
Warmly,

Stanislav
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist8.pair.net/pipermail/geeklog-devel/attachments/20090412/3cbd524b/attachment.html>