Re: 4.2.1 Simple Types (java.util.Date)

From: ow <oneway_111_at_YAHOO.COM>
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 12:43:31 -0700

--- ow <> wrote:
> For consistency sake, I think it would been better if java.util.Date was used
> both for the "client" and the "server" since it is not known if a particular
> client would ever need Calendar's functionality. And if it would, it could
> convert Dates to Calendars.
> My reluctance to deal with Calendar is because we already convert between
> util.Date and sql.Date to get the data into db and back. Now we need to deal
> with Calendar too ... thousands of records ... not good.

I think the spec needs to be changed to add support for java.util.Date on the
"client". This way it'll be consistent with the "server" part and would result
in cleaner code and better performance for applications that do not need
Calendar functionality on the client.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).