[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       jakarta-commons-dev
Subject:    [jira] [Commented] (LANG-1002) Several predefined ISO FastDateFormats in DateFormatUtils are incorre
From:       "Gary Gregory (JIRA)" <jira () apache ! org>
Date:       2014-04-30 21:59:15
Message-ID: JIRA.12711574.1398890725903.210125.1398895155217 () arcas
[Download RAW message or body]


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-1002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13986146#comment-13986146 \
] 

Gary Gregory commented on LANG-1002:
------------------------------------

Very odd indeed. The intent is clearly documented in the unit test. So this is just \
completely wrong. Changing it would break runtime compatibility but what else to do? \
Create new contants with no T's calls ISO8601_.... instead of ISO...?

> Several predefined ISO FastDateFormats in DateFormatUtils are incorrect
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Key: LANG-1002
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-1002
> Project: Commons Lang
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: lang.time.*
> Affects Versions: 3.3.2
> Reporter: Michael Osipov
> 
> Formats {{ISO_TIME_FORMAT}}, {{ISO_TIME_TIME_ZONE_FORMAT}} prepend a {{T}} but this \
> is not correct. Sole time is never prepended by defintion. {{T}} is used only when \
> date *and* time are given. The Javadocs of {{ISO_TIME_NO_T_FORMAT}}, \
> {{ISO_TIME_NO_T_FORMAT}} are in correct too because they say: "This pattern does \
> not comply with the formal ISO8601 specification as the standard requires the 'T' \
> prefix for times." You might want to read [Markus Kuhn's \
> reference|https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.html#time] on that. A solution \
> would be remove the first two and rename the second two by dropping the {{NO_T}} in \
> the name.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]