IIRC, scala-time is a wrapper over joda-time anyway I vote +100 for moving away from Java's dates and all the associated problems. 0-indexed month numbers and thread-unsafe parsing are just the tip of that particular iceberg...
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <[email protected]>wrote: > Anyone else care to comment? Joda Time and Scala Time are both licensed > Apache, so I don't think there would be any issues there, but this would be > a significant change. Would anyone here strongly prefer to stay with > java.util.Date? > > Derek > > > On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Charles F. Munat <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> +1 for joda or scala time if it's not too disruptive >> >> Chas. >> >> Indrajit Raychaudhuri wrote: >> >>> Also, the LiftRules.parseDate function currently does DateTime >> >>> parsing, so I would have to make a breaking change to rename it to >> >>> parseDateTime and add new parseDate and parseTime (and associated >> >>> format methods). Thoughts? >> >> I think this is the right solution. Don't know how much will break >> >> because of this though. But hey, if we're breaking things anyway, why >> >> not put in Joda time (or maybe scala-timehttp:// >> github.com/jorgeortiz85/scala-time/tree/master;-) >> > >> > Although not belonging to breaking changers camp, breaking changes are >> > great when it's for a cause. IMHO, scala time is a darn good cause and >> > worth the break! >> > >> > Cheers, Indrajit >> > >> >> /Jeppe >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
