DateTime.parse should be more clearly defined, able to parse the same sorts of things as JavaScript's Date.parse #10779

alan-knight · 2013-05-21T20:49:01Z

See dartbug.com/10732

I think that reading something like RFC822 dates (and specifically HTTP header dates) might be more appropriate for DateTime.parse than for an internationalization library. Currently the format for DateTime.parse is not clearly defined. It just says a subset of 8601 and has a few examples. It seems like it should either be able to do the same things as JavaScript's Date.parse, or we should clearly define what it does.

floitschG · 2013-05-23T11:40:06Z

Agreed. I updated issue #1878.

Added Duplicate label.
Marked as being merged into #1878.

alan-knight added Type-Defect library-core area-core-library SDK core library issues (core, async, ...); use area-vm or area-web for platform specific libraries. closed-duplicate Closed in favor of an existing report labels May 23, 2013

floitschG mentioned this issue Jun 3, 2015

Specify and extend DateTime.parse #1878

Closed

This issue was closed.

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

DateTime.parse should be more clearly defined, able to parse the same sorts of things as JavaScript's Date.parse #10779

DateTime.parse should be more clearly defined, able to parse the same sorts of things as JavaScript's Date.parse #10779

alan-knight commented May 21, 2013

floitschG commented May 23, 2013

DateTime.parse should be more clearly defined, able to parse the same sorts of things as JavaScript's Date.parse #10779

DateTime.parse should be more clearly defined, able to parse the same sorts of things as JavaScript's Date.parse #10779

Comments

alan-knight commented May 21, 2013

floitschG commented May 23, 2013