(Probably an overkill, but here it goes)
Contact emails [email protected] Explainer No explainer, a specification exists already. Spec https://tc39.github.io/ecma402/#sec-partitiondatetimepattern Summary This change corrects a non-compliant type value in the formatToParts implementation. > new Intl.DateTimeFormat("en-us", {hour12: true, hour: "numeric"}).formatToParts() [{"type": "hour", "value": "6"}, {"type": "literal", "value": " "}, {"type": "day*p*eriod", "value": "PM"}] Will change to - [{"type": "hour", "value": "6"}, {"type": "literal", "value": " "}, {"type": "day*P*eriod", "value": "PM"}] Motivation Compliance with the standards and other browsers and likely most of the code that is already out there. Risks Interoperability and Compatibility Compatibility risk - small to medium at worst. Searched GitHub (not exhaustive, but some indication) for dayperiod instances - https://github.com/search?l=&p=1&q=formatToParts+dayperiod+language%3AJavaScript&type=Code The vast majority are polyfills that use dayPeriod already, or code that uses type.toLowerCase() to bridge over the differences. Sent pull requests to the few cases that were plain wrong - https://github.com/sensu/sensu-go/pull/1852 https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/pull/14790 https://github.com/ray007/js-misc/pull/1 https://github.com/OriginalNexus/venture/pull/1 https://github.com/ua9msn/datetime/pull/9 Interoperability risk - none. Edge: No signals Firefox: Shipped Safari: Shipped Web developers: No signals. Alternatives for web developers Either check for type === "dayPeriod" || type === "dayperiod", or type.toLowerCase() === "dayperiod". Ergonomics Irrelevant. Activation Irrelevant. Debuggability Already debuggable. Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? Yes. Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> ? Nope, but it is tested by test262, though not this case (which is apparently why the interoperability issue exists). *I submitted a test262 pull request to maintain interoperability -* *https://github.com/tc39/test262/pull/1645 <https://github.com/tc39/test262/pull/1645>* Bug and proposed change list - https://crbug.com/865351 https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/1145304 Link to entry on the feature dashboard <https://www.chromestatus.com/> https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5252265900244992 Requesting approval to ship? Yes. I think so. Do you think a deprecation period is warranted? There is no (public?) use counter for formatToParts. ☆*PhistucK* -- -- v8-users mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
