Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:62832 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 91459 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2012 08:14:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Sep 2012 08:14:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.26.188 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.123.26.188 c2beaomr10.btconnect.com Received: from [213.123.26.188] ([213.123.26.188:50513] helo=mail.btconnect.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 23/8E-12568-2D907405 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 04:14:11 -0400 Received: from host81-138-11-136.in-addr.btopenworld.com (EHLO _10.0.0.5_) ([81.138.11.136]) by c2beaomr10.btconnect.com with ESMTP id IVG94851; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 09:14:07 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <504709CE.1000004@lsces.co.uk> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 09:14:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Firefox/13.0 SeaMonkey/2.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "internals@lists.php.net >> PHP internals" References: <50436412.7010802@ajf.me> <5043C3E9.2010105@ajf.me> <5043C5AF.3060701@ajf.me> <5043C74C.8020400@ajf.me> <5043D8C0.3020802@lsces.co.uk> <5044A261.10901@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0303.504709CE.004D, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2012.9.5.75420:17:7.944, ip=81.138.11.136, rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __HAS_FROM, __USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_MAILTO, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, BODY_ENDS_IN_URL, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, RDNS_SUSP, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr10.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0206.504709CF.00A6:SCFSTAT14830815,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC for Adding __toString to DateTime From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) Will Fitch wrote: > Hi, Lester - I'll update the patch and RFC to include this format. This is the > format I'll use unless others have a better approach: > > 2012-09-01T00:00:00-0500 (America/Chicago) Just working through another backlog of 'todo' items. Your current RFC includes -0500 in the examples, but that is purely due to your own setup. This is the real problem here since you can't take a date/time string and clone a new object. You have to define a DateTimeZone object prior to creating the DateTime object. You have 'America/Chicago' set as your default timezone, and that is fine for your local working, but part of Derick's objection is that how this all hangs together is always a two stage process. Now if you can make the above string clone a matching DateTime/DateTimeZone object pair, then part of the objection would go, but *I* would still object to any default here since it's just as likely you want to leave the timezone off and handle it separately as include it in an output string. Also it is worth noting that DateTime::__construct specifically ignores the $timezone parameter when the date string includes an offset! This may well be considered a bug and perhaps $timezone parameter should take priority, but it's all these little things that get missed when one 'just fills in a missing function' ... someone just taking the default string and trying to create a new date object for a different timezone might get caught out, so that particular point should be included in any documentation. Actually currently the returned string would not work anyway? The RFC is 'needs more work' but I still feel that adding this 'shortcut' will create more problems than it will provide any benefit. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk