+1 I think Many Groovy applications could benefit from having this in Groovy.
2017-06-09 1:02 GMT+02:00 Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>: > +1 from me, but I'd be keen to hear Joe's thoughts? > > Cheers, Paul. > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Dinko Srkoč <dinko.sr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 8 June 2017 at 13:34, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote: >> > On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 13:18 +0200, Dinko Srkoč wrote: >> >> On 8 June 2017 at 13:09, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 14:38 +0000, Søren Berg Glasius wrote: >> >> > > I think it makes perfect sense that you can do the same >> >> > > calculations >> >> > > with >> >> > > java.time.* as you can with java.util.Date >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > Shouldn't it be fair to assume that all new code eschews >> >> > java.util.Date >> >> > and all the Calendar stuff, and uses java.time for everything time >> >> > and >> >> > date related? >> >> >> >> I think this falls into a category of "hope" or "wish", rather than >> >> "assumption" :-) >> > >> > True, but I was hoping that unlike a large percentage of Java >> > developers who are hugely reluctant to learn anything new they do not >> > already know (*), Groovy developers were very much into using the best >> > new idiomatic ways of doing things (well except for stuff that is just >> > fashionably trendy for a few days) and keeping their codebases up to >> > date with up-to-date Groovy. >> > >> > Please do not shatter my illusions. >> >> haha! >> >> Okay, I could convince myself that it is indeed so with Groovy >> developers. :-) >> >> > >> > >> > >> > (*) And are thus part of the legacy problem. >> > >> > -- >> > Russel. >> > ============================================================ >> ================= >> > Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: >> sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net >> > 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk >> > London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder >> > >
