|
Thanks - that popping sound was one of my brain cells going - I think you know more about this than I do, I will read up on this though.
Oh well - only 99 more brain cells to go 
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Times are weird 
The conversion between units of time spans depends on the time stamp at which they happen. Months have 28..31 days, some days have 23 hours and there are even minutes with 61 seconds[^].
The difference between your two versions is: does the length of the month of origin count in the conversion month->days?
Variant 1: Yes.
Variant 2: No, unless the date of origin is the first of this month.
Now, I'd go with the simpler rule.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Virang-ji,
Actually, an interesting problem, since so many historical factors (change to Gregorian calendar, adoption in modern times of UTC), as well as cultural/religious, factors can come into play.
I do suggest you move this question to the "Algorithms" forum, or the "Design and Architecture" forum.
And, while you're at it, why not broaden the scope of your task to introduce the options for calculating age based on other calendrical systems which are now extant (Arab, Hebrew, Thai), but, also, ones that are "virtually" extinct (Mayan comes to mind).
I suppose it might also be interesting to know one's age in hours, minutes, or seconds (age in days or nights being quite problematic due to diurnal/nocturnal duration variation in circadian rhythms with latitude ?).
Personally, since I believe that life in human form begins at a moment of lunacy: I would like the option to know my age in terms of number of lunar cycles ... of course with that one you also get longitude coming into the mix ? ...
best, Bill
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle
|
|
|
|
|
Bill, traditionally one measured one's age in lunacy.
The old prophets of the bible did not live to be 900+ years, that is rubbish, and based on the assumption that age was annual.
Assuming that they made 900+ months would have meant they were in their 70's, which is much more reasonable (And yet still very old for the times, so consequently they would have been seen as wise simply through experience (The first case of QBE?))
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I think if you choose either one of the two options, the confusion might still be there for the user who interprets the program output.
Counting in years/weeks/days could be an interesting solution maybe, since weeks have a fixed length.
modified 13-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Give or take.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
True, but since a week is exactly 7 days, no inaccuracy is added if days are used already
modified 13-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You are making an assumption that days are all the same length!
This is even weirder[^] as it varies its week length and has a strange set of rules.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I understood that you meant that days can vary in length and as a result the length of a week too, but the length of a week expressed in days is always 7. So if days are already acceptable, weeks don't make it less accurate.
About the Ethiopian calendar... I will admit I hadn't considered that 
modified 13-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
