On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 12:04:23PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 07:58:51PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Yep. The regression tests show what I would expect. I'll check in
> > details later.
>
> I have spent some time on that today and applied this patch down to
> 9.6, after adding more comments and simplifying a bit the calculation
> method used. Instead of using the "mon" variable to store an
> intermediate result, I have simplified things so as this only uses
> tm->tm_mon, and "mon" for the position in the roman-numeral array is
> adjusted only once.
Thanks Michael! I thought we'd want to keep the original calculation for
consistency, but directly computing the needed offset is clearly simpler to
read!
