-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rewrite date processing in API v2 #1006
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6fe7b14
refactor (api-v2): Start refactoring date utility code (#928).
2bbba03
refactor (api-v2): Rewrite date processing in API v2 using ICU4J.
dcb087d
test (CalendarDateUtilV2): Add more era tests.
06c73e7
test (CalendarDateUtilV2): Add remaining tests from v1.
9f732de
style (api-v2): Clean up code a bit.
0a4bf0e
test (CalendarDateUtilV2): Clean up code.
c1977f8
feature (CalendarDateUtilV2): Check that start date is not later than…
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we get rid of
val jodd = "org.jodd" % "jodd" % "3.2.6"
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or do you want to leave
DateUtilV1
as it is? Could we make call v1 v2 methods?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
DateUtilV1
uses jodd. I could refactor it to use the v2 code, but that would be more work. My idea was to avoid changing v1 if possible, because the priority is to finish v2.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand. My concern is that both versions of the API have to behave identically when converting from and to JDN and that this might be more difficult to assure if we use two different libraries for v1 and v2.
But of course, there could be a version update of one of those libraries and then we would have the same issue if the new version behaves differently from the old one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The tests for v1 and v2 are identical, so if that happens, I think we'll know. I'd be willing to change v1 to use v2, but I'd rather do it later, when v2 is done.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, could you create a separate issue for that so we can do it later?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#1007