On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 08:42:33PM +0000, Sami Kerola wrote:
> +struct cal_request {
> + int day;
> + int month;
> + long year;
> + int week;
> +};
It makes more sense than cal_width :-)
> + ctl.req.day = day_in_year(ctl.req.day, ctl.req.month, ctl.req.year);
req.day = calculate_request_day(&req);
> -static void monthly(int day, int month, long year, const struct cal_control *ctl)
> +static void monthly(const struct cal_control *ctl)
...
> - rows = do_monthly(day, month, year, &out, -1, ctl);
> + rows = do_monthly(ctl->req.day, ctl->req.month, ctl->req.year, &out, -1, ctl);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well, if you have a request struct then use it!
do_monthly(req, &out, -1, ctl);
Maybe you can keep request and control structs independent, so then
one day you can implement something like
cal --date=Dec-2013 --date=Dec-2014
to print more independent calendars :-)
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
