Thread overview | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
April 21, 2015 std.datetime.parseRFC822DateTime | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
std.datetime contains parseRFC822DateTime to convert from an RFC822/RFC5322 formatted string (ala "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 -0800") to a SysTime. Does it contain anything for the converse - converting from a SysTime to "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 -0800"? If not, should it? |
April 21, 2015 Re: std.datetime.parseRFC822DateTime | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jakob Ovrum | On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 08:14:10 Jakob Ovrum via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> std.datetime contains parseRFC822DateTime to convert from an RFC822/RFC5322 formatted string (ala "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 -0800") to a SysTime.
>
> Does it contain anything for the converse - converting from a SysTime to "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 -0800"?
>
> If not, should it?
No, it does not contain the reverse. It was added specifically for the installer. If it weren't for that, std.datetime wouldn't support it at all. It's a horrible format that should just die. The only reason to use it is because the e-mail spec (and thus specs like HTTP) unfortunately uses it. However, anyone that's going to need to generate the format for anything like that is going to need a lot more than that that Phobos doesn't provide anyway, so I really don't think that it's much of a loss. Regardless, I'm strongly of the opinion that anything dealing with that format should be restricted to a library for e-mail or HTTP, and if it weren't for the fact that the installer needed to be able to read it (I forget why), I would have argued strongly against adding parseRFC822DateTime to Phobos.
- Jonathan M Davis
|
April 21, 2015 Re: std.datetime.parseRFC822DateTime | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jonathan M Davis | On Tuesday, 21 April 2015 at 10:28:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 08:14:10 Jakob Ovrum via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: >> std.datetime contains parseRFC822DateTime to convert from an >> RFC822/RFC5322 formatted string (ala "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 >> -0800") to a SysTime. >> >> Does it contain anything for the converse - converting from a >> SysTime to "Sat, 6 Jan 1990 12:14:19 -0800"? >> >> If not, should it? > > No, it does not contain the reverse. It was added specifically for the > installer. If it weren't for that, std.datetime wouldn't support it at all. > It's a horrible format that should just die. The only reason to use it is > because the e-mail spec (and thus specs like HTTP) unfortunately uses it. > However, anyone that's going to need to generate the format for anything > like that is going to need a lot more than that that Phobos doesn't provide > anyway, so I really don't think that it's much of a loss. Regardless, I'm > strongly of the opinion that anything dealing with that format should be > restricted to a library for e-mail or HTTP, and if it weren't for the fact > that the installer needed to be able to read it (I forget why), I would have > argued strongly against adding parseRFC822DateTime to Phobos. > > - Jonathan M Davis I needed it for the If-Modified-Since HTTP header, through std.net.curl.HTTP.addRequestHeader. Phobos has HTTP support and this is the preferred date format according to spec. Phobos should support it. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation