I also think it's sane to keep the Java 8 ordering in this case.
Even if we can use ranges, keeping upto / downto in addition would be kind
to people used to using them.
Anyhow, very nice work!
I still believe we need to integrate it to Groovy core :-)
Guillaume
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Ahm Avoby <aliencheck...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> @static parse(): I am with you on keeping the Java 8 API ordering, but I
> would not jettison the upto and downto methods, as to not confuse people
> switching from Java 8 to Groovy.
>
> Cheers,
> Ahm
>
>
>
> Joe Wolf <joew...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 25. Juni 2017, 23:32:
>
>> Goodtimes 1.1 is out with new extension methods on the zone-based types,
>> effectively covering the entire java.time.* package (except for Clock,
>> which I haven't found need to extend). I'd say I'm about 98% content with
>> the API.
>>
>> I'm mulling the addition of static parse() methods akin to the Groovy
>> JDK's Date.parse(String format, String input) method, but am wrestling with
>> argument ordering. Date.parse accepts the format as the first argument; the
>> new java.time API parse methods accept the date/time string first. Although
>> I've aimed to be consistent with the Groovy JDK thus far, I'm leaning
>> towards following the Java 8 API ordering in this case.
>>
>> On the other side of the coin, I am contemplating jettisoning the upto
>> and downto methods. Since the java.time types are Comparable and goodtimes
>> adds next() and previous() methods, the range operator can be used to
>> replicate their function
>>
>> earlier.upto(later) {} --> (earlier..later).each {}
>> later.downto(earlier) {} --> (later..earlier).each {}
>>
>> I'm also questioning the existence of the getAt(int calendarField)
>> methods. On the downside, it's munging the older java.util API with the
>> new; on the upside, I don't have to explicitly import
>> java.time.temporal.ChronoField.
>> java.util.Calendar comes for free.
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Keep us updated on the new extensions, and once you're happy with what
>>> you have come up with, I believe it'd really be awesome to have it
>>> integrated.
>>>
>>> Guillaume
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Joe Wolf <joew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 for me. I think it's a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> Not everything in the current API may be worthwhile to have as part of
>>>> Groovy proper, though. For example, the bridging methods from the java.time
>>>> classes back to Date and Calendar could be unnecessarily promoting the
>>>> latter's usage.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, I'm currently working to add extension methods to the
>>>> java.time types involving ZoneId and ZoneOffset. I hope to have that
>>>> completed in a couple of weeks or so.
>>>>
>>>> -Joe
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Mario Garcia <mario.g...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume Laforge
>>> Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
>>> Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform
>>>
>>> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
>>> Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
>>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
>>>
>>
>>
--
Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform
Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
