Date fails on dd/mm/yyyy

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 15:35 +0100, Loïc Grenié wrote:
>  (yyyy/mm/dd is not that bad: it respect
>   alphabetical order as well)

Hi,

"alphabetical order" for dates?

You aren't entirely wrong, however we have got "numerical order" and 
"lexicographical ordering" etc. pp. and actually numbers aren't part of
the alphabet.

"Another example of a non-dictionary use of lexicographical ordering
appears in the ISO 8601 standard for dates, which expresses a date as
YYYY-MM-DD. This formatting scheme has the advantage that the
lexicographical order on sequences of characters that represent dates
coincides with the chronological order: an earlier CE date is smaller in
the lexicographical order than a later date up to year 9999. This date
ordering makes computerized sorting of dates easier by avoiding the need
for a separate sorting algorithm." -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicographic_order

You point related to "chronological order" and/or "lexical order" is ok,
but the term "alphabetical order" is wrong.

Btw. in the past, on the C64 and similar vintage computers, we needed to
sort in Assembly by ourself.

Nowadays, in the times of bloatware and AI, sorting easily in a country-
specific ways should be standard routines. We have countless
counterproductive bloatware and idiotic AI algorithms. It's easy to sort
in a human readable country-specific way with or without AI and with a
minimum of bloat.

Stupidly, programming is no longer a craft, but has become a way of life
for academic fools.

Regards,
Ralf