logoalt Hacker News

ssl-3 • yesterday at 6:43 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

Other things were reported to successfully be printed on Tuesdays, so that inclusion (or at least, this form of it) is empirically unnecessary.

And the whole CreationDate field is optional in PostScript[1], anyway.

[1]: https://www.adobe.com/jp/print/postscript/pdfs/PLRM.pdf


Replies

notatoad • yesterday at 6:48 PM

>so that inclusion empirically unnecessary

this seems like a post-rationalization. when an app generates a file to send to another service, it's usually a good practice to timestamp that. unless you're severely bandwidth-constrained, putting a timestamp in your protocol almost always solves more problems than it creates. "we shouldn't include a timestamp because it might at some point trigger a date-math bug" is just not how software gets built.

➕ show 1 reply