Ah yes the temporalFormat. I've removed temporalFormat and added instantFormat, localDateFormat, localDateTimeFormat, localTimeFormat, offsetDateTimeFormat, offsetTimeFormat, yearFormat, yearMonthFormat and zonedDateTimeFormat.
See the commit: https://github.com/Jaaap/freemarker/commit/b55d03d10e4e9531a85674dfed8825e9dd230d8b In branch: https://github.com/Jaaap/freemarker/tree/FREEMARKER-35 Regards, Teun > On 2020-02-15, at 00:34, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have created a FREEMARKER-35 branch for this activity, branching of off > 2.3-gae. You should use that branch in your local clone as well, but > anyhow, when you open the PR, select FREEMARKER-35 as the target branch too. > > For us to accept the PR the Contributor License Agreement will be needed > (see https://freemarker.apache.org/contribute.html). But you can create the > PR whenever you prefer, and later commits you make in your clone in the > same branch will automatically belong to it till it's accepted. > > As of the interesting part, the code. I will review it closer eventually, > but at first quick sight I think it can be good. The "temporal_format" > setting surely will need refinement, because you want to be able to specify > one format per specific temporal type, like one for local date, one for > local time, one for year month, etc. But of course that can be done in > later commits too. Also, the minimum Java version will have to be > raised from 7 to 8 for 2.3.31 (where this feature can appear earliest), but > w will do that then. > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 5:13 PM Teun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes it is a lot of work. >> The commit below focusses on the formatting of various Temporals, so no >> parsing etc. >> >> https://github.com/Jaaap/freemarker/commit/8bf5a91de2c47b191b5d68c7506abfbb350626ab >> < >> https://github.com/Jaaap/freemarker/commit/8bf5a91de2c47b191b5d68c7506abfbb350626ab >>> >> >> Should i make a pull request based on this commit or are there >> intermediate steps to be taken? >> >> regards, Teun >> >>> On 2020-02-12, at 23:50, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> No, you will only needed CLA when your pull request needs to be merged. >>> >>> Note that adding Java 8 support will have quite a lot consequences in FM. >>> Many parts touched. At least in principle, we should add a lot of new >>> TemplateModel subinterfaces... given how many types are there in >> java.time, >>> that will be awkward. And then integrating all that with all the places >>> that can now explicitly handle TemplateDateModel, TemplateDateTimeModel, >>> and TemplateTimeModel. So, yeah, it's not accidental that nobody has >>> invested into this yet. :) >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Daniel Dekany >> >> > > -- > Best regards, > Daniel Dekany
