From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Edward Reingold Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The Emacs Calculator and calendar Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 15:51:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87y5jk3f7d.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d040716131c79c404cb5609ca X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349470299 8764 80.91.229.3 (5 Oct 2012 20:51:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 20:51:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: jay.p.belanger@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 05 22:51:44 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TKEry-0005kg-PT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 22:51:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33272 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKErt-0002YP-2L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:51:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37881) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKErq-0002Uq-DE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:51:31 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKErp-0000UO-9h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:51:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]:60470) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKErp-0000Tq-2W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:51:29 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id k6so1787874lbo.0 for ; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:51:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=njko0+h5oDP5KoHIKVhRBRWdUT3TW9PBTlnQ/UkBrZ8=; b=WSiKW505buyC3sLKbjqG3WEe4juAP/6KsOAz5DOgemkigNxuNaq+W/5M9Zvk713g7c EW17gwGDYUgtoNoJbFfzNb6hN6MW96N1/xIIaVXan+sUNK9WMsn+TPUwqDAG13We0A6d 1Gf9cbDdPRcwjnrolDvEG+D+Gm+Fz4D1yI7wm1+1cWMp4qwvpcTqAL7NrXuLopn3Swek 0PCaaMTRRbaCrlATJhsW7IDcZDjMt6Qh5htG4K/67sIQhO/VDpg19yAjFXrav3Oj4K6n j2xbSDy2mRVH4PQ2/h2RfvSzJU+JS0iMhyd3BpARu6YS3wuaOy2Q9Kh8UmTnb0+AYMsN Rz3Q== Original-Received: by 10.152.106.237 with SMTP id gx13mr7758373lab.46.1349470287329; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.112.38.73 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 13:51:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y5jk3f7d.fsf@gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: UJXv9SGTYPB4w9JpVkgCerkjddI X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.217.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:154103 Archived-At: --f46d040716131c79c404cb5609ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I would say it even more strongly: the Unix cal and the Emacs calc are foolish chimeras; there were hundreds of different dates of adoption of the Gregorian calendar, stretching almost 400 years. Emacs calendar does the only sane thing. On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jay Belanger wrote: > > Calc and the Emacs calendar use different calendar systems. > From the Calc manual: > Calc uses a combination of the Gregorian and Julian calendars, > following the history of Great Britain and the British colonies. > This is the same calendar that is used by the `cal' program in most > Unix implementations. > and from the Emacs manual: > The Emacs calendar displayed is _always_ the Gregorian calendar, > sometimes called the "new style" calendar, which is used in most of the > world today. However, this calendar did not exist before the sixteenth > century and was not widely used before the eighteenth century; it did > not fully displace the Julian calendar and gain universal acceptance > until the early twentieth century. The Emacs calendar can display any > month since January, year 1 of the current era, but the calendar > displayed is always the Gregorian, even for a date at which the > Gregorian calendar did not exist. > So, for example, the day before September 14, 1752 is > September 2, 1752 according to Calc and September 13, 1752 according > to the calendar. > > Is this acceptable, or should they be made consistent? > > Jay > > --f46d040716131c79c404cb5609ca Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I would say it even more strongly: the Unix cal and the Emacs calc are fool= ish chimeras; there
were hundreds of different dates of adoption of the = Gregorian calendar, stretching almost 400 years.
Emacs calendar does the= only sane thing.

On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jay Belanger= <jay.p.belanger@gmail.com> wrote:

Calc and the Emacs calendar use different calendar systems.
>From the Calc manual:
=A0 Calc uses a combination of the Gregorian and Julian calendars,
=A0 following the history of Great Britain and the British colonies.
=A0 This is the same calendar that is used by the `cal' program in most=
=A0 Unix implementations.
and from the Emacs manual:
=A0 The Emacs calendar displayed is _always_ the Gregorian calendar,
=A0 sometimes called the "new style" calendar, which is used in m= ost of the
=A0 world today. =A0However, this calendar did not exist before the sixteen= th
=A0 century and was not widely used before the eighteenth century; it did =A0 not fully displace the Julian calendar and gain universal acceptance =A0 until the early twentieth century. =A0The Emacs calendar can display an= y
=A0 month since January, year 1 of the current era, but the calendar
=A0 displayed is always the Gregorian, even for a date at which the
=A0 Gregorian calendar did not exist.
So, for example, the day before September 14, 1752 is
September 2, 1752 according to Calc and September 13, 1752 according
to the calendar.

Is this acceptable, or should they be made consistent?

Jay


--f46d040716131c79c404cb5609ca--