|
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Ryan Pusztai <rpusztai@gmail.com> wrote:pl.Date is still very young - in particular there's a fair amount of
> so much. This is a huge addition to me. We also use the "Date" library,
> could this replace the LfW Date library?
existing work in [1] that I want to evaluate.
What _do_ we need here?