▲ 748 ▼ Overly honest out of office email (programming.dev) submitted 1 year ago by irelephant@programming.dev to c/iiiiiiitttttttttttt@programming.dev 40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (7 children) So you use year/month/day right? Right!?? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] jve@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago https://lemmy.sdf.org/c/iso8601 ISO8601 gang rise up. permalink fedilink source parent [–] i_love_FFT@jlai.lu 7 points 1 year ago YES! But when there's absolutely no ambiguity on the year, it can be skipped... Feels weird though. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (4 children) 100% And I name all of my filenames by YYYYMMDD and then the relevant name. Vastly superior and naturally intuitive. I also accept DDMMYYYY but I'm in the US and it's not as intuitive for others around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Your way is automatically sorted by date when sorting by name and that's just, oh , uhhjh nnnnnngggg ahh. Please excuse me as I change my pants permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or — hear me out — or you could sort by name if you want to sort by name and sort by modification date if you want to sort by modification date – and get this – sort by creation date if you want to sort by creation date. No need to shove two pieces of information in the same field. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago But creation date and or modification date aren't always the dates I want to sort by, so I use the same convention yyyy-mm-dd_name for most of my filenames too. It works for me, shoving those pieces of information all up in there. Lovin some shovin. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago YYYYMM~1.BAT YYYYMM~2.BAT ... Superior? I don't think so. Signed DOS. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jve@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago https://lemmy.sdf.org/c/iso8601 ISO8601 gang rise up. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] i_love_FFT@jlai.lu 7 points 1 year ago YES! But when there's absolutely no ambiguity on the year, it can be skipped... Feels weird though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (4 children) 100% And I name all of my filenames by YYYYMMDD and then the relevant name. Vastly superior and naturally intuitive. I also accept DDMMYYYY but I'm in the US and it's not as intuitive for others around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Your way is automatically sorted by date when sorting by name and that's just, oh , uhhjh nnnnnngggg ahh. Please excuse me as I change my pants permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or — hear me out — or you could sort by name if you want to sort by name and sort by modification date if you want to sort by modification date – and get this – sort by creation date if you want to sort by creation date. No need to shove two pieces of information in the same field. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago But creation date and or modification date aren't always the dates I want to sort by, so I use the same convention yyyy-mm-dd_name for most of my filenames too. It works for me, shoving those pieces of information all up in there. Lovin some shovin. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago YYYYMM~1.BAT YYYYMM~2.BAT ... Superior? I don't think so. Signed DOS. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Your way is automatically sorted by date when sorting by name and that's just, oh , uhhjh nnnnnngggg ahh. Please excuse me as I change my pants permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or — hear me out — or you could sort by name if you want to sort by name and sort by modification date if you want to sort by modification date – and get this – sort by creation date if you want to sort by creation date. No need to shove two pieces of information in the same field. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago But creation date and or modification date aren't always the dates I want to sort by, so I use the same convention yyyy-mm-dd_name for most of my filenames too. It works for me, shoving those pieces of information all up in there. Lovin some shovin. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or — hear me out — or you could sort by name if you want to sort by name and sort by modification date if you want to sort by modification date – and get this – sort by creation date if you want to sort by creation date. No need to shove two pieces of information in the same field. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago But creation date and or modification date aren't always the dates I want to sort by, so I use the same convention yyyy-mm-dd_name for most of my filenames too. It works for me, shoving those pieces of information all up in there. Lovin some shovin. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago But creation date and or modification date aren't always the dates I want to sort by, so I use the same convention yyyy-mm-dd_name for most of my filenames too. It works for me, shoving those pieces of information all up in there. Lovin some shovin. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago YYYYMM~1.BAT YYYYMM~2.BAT ... Superior? I don't think so. Signed DOS. permalink fedilink source parent