Skip to content
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

Evaluate DateTimeFormatter as replacement of SimpleDateFormat for internal usage #3482

Open
scordio opened this issue May 20, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #3483
Open

Evaluate DateTimeFormatter as replacement of SimpleDateFormat for internal usage #3482

scordio opened this issue May 20, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #3483
Assignees
Labels
type: improvement A general improvement
Milestone

Comments

@scordio
Copy link
Member

scordio commented May 20, 2024

We use SimpleDateFormat in many date-related assertions and this has some drawbacks, for example:

We might instead consider using DateTimeFormatter, which supports nanosecond granularity.

@scordio scordio added the type: improvement A general improvement label May 20, 2024
@scordio scordio modified the milestones: 3.27.0, 3.26.0 May 20, 2024
joel-costigliola added a commit that referenced this issue May 20, 2024
…TE_TIME, ISO_LOCAL_DATE_TIME, ISO_LOCAL_DATE DateTimeFormatter and Timestamp parsing as supported by Timestamp.valueOf(String).

Fix #3482
@scordio scordio modified the milestones: 3.26.0, 3.27.0 May 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: improvement A general improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants