From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23501 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2010 16:46:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 23486 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Oct 2010 16:46:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_MID X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:46:50 +0000 From: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/45896] [C++0x] Facet time_get not reading dates according to the IEEE 1003 standard. X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Priority Summary Severity In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:46:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00415.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20101005164600.9ZKwpEOgUKuqC2-qPGzcBP02lzQbtueVd42tbUDxXSo@z> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45896 Paolo Carlini changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P3 |P4 Summary|Facet time_get not reading |[C++0x] Facet time_get not |dates according to the |reading dates according to |standard. |the IEEE 1003 standard. Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2010-10-05 16:46:41 UTC --- I suppose you are referring to the sentences "leading zeros shall be permitted but shall not be required", right? Because they do *not* exist in the C(99) ISO Standard, which is the normative reference for C++98, in this area. In general, ISO 8601, in turn, is pretty strict about those formats. Only C++0x references explicitly "the ISO/IEC 9945 function strptime" (ISO/IEC 9945 is the same as IEEE 1003), which is more flexible about leading zeros. Thus, C++0x work, in due course...