> > > > You had a rant the other day about putting yourself in the shoes of ordinary > > users, > > > > and how being a dev can cloud that, this is a prime example, ordinary users > > prefer > > > to > > > > see a build date. > > > > > > Ordinary users need the version number, period. > > > > > > If they're building from Git, then they need the Git ID instead of the version > > > number, but either way the date doesn't come into it. I could build 0.115 today > > with > > > today's timestamp and the timestamp is going to be 100% useless for any practical > > > purposes. > > > > but if you were to find a build of 115 with a much newer date than expected it > tells > > you that it isn't a compile from when that version was released, but one that, for > > whatever reason, was compiled more recently, which is actually a useful piece of > > information. > > I'm not familiar enough with linux, but isn't there a "file created/accessed/modified > date" equivalent ? > > I've always managed file under windows using this.
It can be lost, as I said, I've picked up files off an old CD before where said data was lost, so knowing the compile dates was handy.
I'm actually amazed so few devs disagree because when we're *actually emulating stuff* this very same information, if left embedded in the ROMs etc. is really, really fucking useful and we use it quite frequently.
Index 
Flat 
Re: MAME.exe no longer showing compile date?
Reply
Re: MAME.exe no longer showing compile date?
