Bug #107093 for Time-Date: What does this achieve that Time::Piece and Time::Moment don't?

Mon Sep 14 17:33:45 2015 mst [...] shadowcat.co.uk - Ticket created

Subject:	What does this achieve that Time::Piece and Time::Moment don't?
Date:	Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:55:46 +0000
To:	bugs-Time-Date [...] rt.cpan.org
From:	Matt S Trout <mst [...] shadowcat.co.uk>

I can't quite work out why you'd want to use this over the existing code? -- Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/ http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/ Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.

Mon Sep 14 20:46:29 2015 ARISTOTLE [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

I have the same question. Consider this a request to add a “Wherefore Time::Date?” section to your POD.

Mon Sep 14 20:46:30 2015 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

Fri Jul 21 16:56:12 2017 JACOBG [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On Mon Sep 14 17:33:45 2015, mst@shadowcat.co.uk wrote: Show quoted text

> I can't quite work out why you'd want to use this over the existing code? >

It's just a preference. I like that underlying data structure is the unix epoch instead of the list of numbers returned by localtime. It comes in handy when comparing dates. It's also nice when you have to work with dates formatted like "2017-01-02 03:04:05" (mysql returns dates like this) which you can use in this module like Time::Date->new("2017-01-02 03:04:05") and then you can print it back out like print "$date\n".

Wed Nov 01 12:42:27 2017 JACOBG [...] cpan.org - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'