Closed
Bug 7332
Opened 25 years ago
Closed 25 years ago
Sort should be sorted by the actual date, not by alphabets
Categories
(MailNews Core :: Backend, defect, P3)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
FIXED
M9
People
(Reporter: fenella, Assigned: scottputterman)
Details
RE: Linux, Win32 and Mac dated (1999-05-28-08 m7) steps: From Messenger, select View|Sort|By Date or click on the Date column sort sorts alphabetically, it should have been sorted by the actual date. Actual result: When sorting incrementally, 5/5/99 is displayed after 5/28/99 Expected result: 5/5/99 should come before 5/28/99 if it is sorted by actual date.
Updated•25 years ago
|
Assignee: phil → putterman
Comment 1•25 years ago
|
||
Reassign to putterman
Assignee | ||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Target Milestone: M8
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•25 years ago
|
||
Robert, Do you have any idea on how we can do this?
Comment 3•25 years ago
|
||
Yeah. Along with resources and strings, RDF allows for integer and date literals. Perhaps you should return a date literal instead of a string. Also, the XUL sorting code currently only handles strings, so it needs to be made a bit smarter as well, so that it knows how to sort on date and integer literals also.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•25 years ago
|
||
If we can do that, that would be great. The last time I tried using a Date Literal a few months ago, it didn't work. Does it work now?
Comment 5•25 years ago
|
||
I've never tried using it. What were the problems you were seeing with date literals?
Assignee | ||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Target Milestone: M8 → M9
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•25 years ago
|
||
I don't think Date Literals were supported when I tried it. I'm willing to try it again if you want to do it. In order for me to sort by date, we'll have to do something like this. I'm changing this milestone to M9, however.
Comment 8•25 years ago
|
||
Date literals... yep, that's the ticket.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•25 years ago
|
||
I've switched the code over in my tree to use nsIRDFDate which means this should be taken care of. I'll check it in either today or tomorrow. When I check this in, the fix for Bug 4763, about using I18N format for dates is going to break until similar code is used in RDF. It actually turns out that we haven't been using this fix for a while because of Mac problems in the DateTimeFormat code. But anyway, this is just a heads up on this.
Comment 10•25 years ago
|
||
>Mac problems in the DateTimeFormat code. Problem was in the Macintosh client (caller) which was passing year based on 1970 instead of 1900 required by tm time. I am adding PRTime support (bug 9229) to nsIDateTimeFormat so the clients have option not to use tm time.
Assignee | ||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•25 years ago
|
||
I'm now using nsIRDFDate and letting RDF sort for me. This should be working now.
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•25 years ago
|
||
Linux and Mac (1999-07-19-11-m9) and Win_nt 4.0 (1999-07-19-12 m9) I do not see this problem any more.
Updated•20 years ago
|
Product: MailNews → Core
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: Core → MailNews Core
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•