Re: regexp novice

Stuart Dallas" <stuart@3ft9.com> wrote:

On 18 May 2012, at 14:50, Jim Giner wrote:

Daft is a little harsh. :) 00:40 is just not a time value that is generally accepted.

It may appear harsh, but as far as I'm concerned it is daft to make assumptions like that. You've essentially disallowed 12:nn am, but allowed 1:nn am, 2:nn am, 3:nn am, etc, because you're not validating the data in a non-ambiguous way. I have no idea what you're developing, but you're making a big assumption about the data that you're getting, which may appear reasonable to you, but to me it's daft. Nothing personal, just my opinion, which is all I have to offer.

Unless I've missed something, he hasn't disallowed 12:nn am, only 00:nn. If you're going to only accept 12-hour input, this is the right thing to do. 00:nn is not a valid 12-hour representation - only times from 1:nn to 12:nn are acceptable. If you were to accept 00:nn, you'd have to also accept 13:nn-23:nn as well, for consistancy. Granted, not specifying am or pm adds a layer of ambiguity, but maybe that's not relevant for this query. For example, maybe there's also a select field that has am and pm as options. As it appears that accepting only 12-hour input is part of the brief, Jim is IMHO doing the right thing. Geoff.