-=> Maurice Kinal wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

 MK> -={ Sunday, 01 May 2016, 01:06:44.931189447 +1000 }=-

 MK> Hey Tony!

 TL> Story of my life

 MK> Excellent.  Speaking of which, what do you think about the above
 MK> extra-special datetime stamp?  I was thinking of using the %s and
 MK> possibly the %N that created the one between the '-={ }=-' in the msg
 MK> header instead of the ftn one.
 MK>  That way the enduser could configure whatever style of datetime stamp
 MK> they want as far as their display is concerned.  The obsolete ftn one
 MK> can be tacked on once any messages are packed for distribution beyond
 MK> the host node.

For the local system, why not.  Resolution does exceed accuracy by a few orders
of magnitude I suspect, unless you run your own GPS locked time server on your
LAN. :-)

 MK> As an example the above datetime in the header would be
 MK> "1462028804.931189447".
 MK>  That can be converted with;

 MK>   :read !date --date="{at}1462028804.931189447"
 MK> Sat Apr 30 15:06:44 UTC 2016

 MK> which is the standard output for 'date' on any Linux system I have ever
 MK> seen, including the UTC part.

I use the date command a lot, usually to create timestamps of the format
YYYYMMDDHHMMSSS.sssssssss, which are useful for things like timestamping
filenames (and having them appear in chronological order in directory listings
:) ).  I'm sure you can work out the format string ;)  But your format allows
for all of these possibilities, so I think that's an excellent idea for the
actual message timestamp - simple and easily converted with the date command
into anything we like. :)


... Growing older is typical. Growing up is the option.
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49