Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120514 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 53322 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2023 18:34:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2023 18:34:31 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E06180089 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:34:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT, FREEMAIL_FROM,MISSING_HEADERS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-oi1-f171.google.com (mail-oi1-f171.google.com [209.85.167.171]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-f171.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3980c92d8d6so2086434b6e.0 for ; Fri, 02 Jun 2023 11:34:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1685730869; x=1688322869; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=XU50pXisZNc7XlrQcI4iMQL1NGggDNJYhAxq1S4rtAk=; b=n9s9vhaCrDVhIRHkTGBbCc5Wde8WIbdXr5sXYl+MJabT/GRtarYp7qnVU3FYvWcY5n 5TQ8DsjWhM9WGuGOX9NU8O2w2/nDC9dFP79dqoyBLBdUt6g9RIuFM1kW8fjZXFMind4h oHi9HRO1t5ZsCXU9ZIkICMPoIzIuo3SvGujlR14faUX0NFbUpAAmZo4SOH2iJU3jYwG1 2LGRtQPN1Op14vxSzrBQW2fARKB+cutotP6TJ7JKZ94fGdeIytcUyPtYbMO3GlmDwuJH ktnVlPv+CYt07v9umkmK4ybV/+6OG3H7uWLHkqux9UYeE5dnSriO7rGItUjo/Vo5jqqU +p0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685730869; x=1688322869; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XU50pXisZNc7XlrQcI4iMQL1NGggDNJYhAxq1S4rtAk=; b=AajzkvHtJoG/62PeX8rASDgNu0wFFKrzq5VF7Q+mi7TJt5gIkQAZ0JHVtJpGCaWV55 HRjw9DE6kte0rN4M9IpadT6mjZN/oSaw4AXyxc0GIp/q4oCT0b/GHO8lH9BcAoKQgqOM j7GrQV3ZeJ655vFkm2SuKxbVt+cqMHgoWma+e1aJ84z93Nnq99Lpj74R6IKNnCnzIOfF gVhdFTLQjD45+q7CkidoSqMjmGsPC0dl/0hVDN56nZaw23S2BiS6RViu2JNtZPqFXXE9 hsiYog1QOZLEOW+52qIzGX5a2Ww1KBehBCU0R+qAAaF9mX7i60y4T5Mx7Z7Apeonh05H em0A== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwZVjO8KIzQChHJtg+xGjiIWUzt/6B2wOhftwv/Hw0QrC8e8Q1v pkMUkyNJ/nsxmm+tdapgpWLJ63756Zvzx9+fj8gWF4LMZvtK9Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7ZQdDkEfR2y8ohpq/vLLdP/7xrU1QJAMf2GYfR0FUM9J7mszCQQp2gfVr4LDIV+xTD3Cc/JMApe4WdRyGnf+c= X-Received: by 2002:aca:650c:0:b0:398:dd2d:b114 with SMTP id m12-20020aca650c000000b00398dd2db114mr664020oim.58.1685730869160; Fri, 02 Jun 2023 11:34:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <25c841b2-d179-ba8d-d452-d0cdd28363d8@php.net> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 20:33:52 +0200 Message-ID: Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Deprecation of the formats DATE_ISO8601 and DATE_RFC7231 From: divinity76@gmail.com (Hans Henrik Bergan) DATE_ISO8601 doesn't have to be removed anytime soon, but no new code should be written using that constant, thus an E_DEPRECATED is warranted. Is anyone really arguing against that statement? On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 18:26, Hans Henrik Bergan wro= te: > > >In my opinion, deprecating this does not do anything besides annoying > users. > > In my opinion, since it isn't, and likely never was, a legal ISO8601 > string, it's a no-brainer that it should be deprecated. (it's at least > been illegal since iso8601:2004 released in 2004) > > On Fri, 26 May 2023 at 12:17, Derick Rethans wrote: > > > > On Fri, 19 May 2023, Jorg Sowa wrote: > > > > > I would like to propose the deprecation of the constants DATE_ISO8601= , > > > DateTimeInterface::ISO8601 and DateTimeInterface::RFC7231, DATE_RFC72= 31. > > > > =E2=80=A6 > > > > > In my opinion the question is not whether this constant should be > > > deprecated, but when. I know that the problem was discussed in the pa= st, > > > but I hope enough time has passed already to touch this topic again > > > although of the BC nature. [6] > > > [7] > > > > In my opinion, deprecating this does not do anything besides annoying > > users. > > > > > > > > Arguments for deprecating DATE_RFC7231: > > > - error prone nature, the format never really supported timezone. I'm= not > > > sure how it appeared in the code, but tests clearly lack cases for th= is > > > format. I'm not sure if it was missed on purpose, but with tests it w= ould > > > be obvious that the format shouldn't ever appear in the core. [8] > > > [9] > > > > > > > This should instead be fixed of being deprecated. It is a recent > > addition after all. > > > > cheers, > > Derick > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php