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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Explicitly state in the spec why we don't have parse methods #424

Closed
sffc opened this issue Apr 2, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #463
Closed

Explicitly state in the spec why we don't have parse methods #424

sffc opened this issue Apr 2, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #463
Assignees
@ryzokuken
Labels
c: meta Component: intl-wide issues editorial Involves an editorial fix s: in progress Status: the issue has an active proposal
Milestone
ES 2021

Comments

@sffc
Copy link
Contributor

sffc commented Apr 2, 2020

We have received requests for parsing on numerous occasions; for example, #1, #147, and #342. Besides the discussion in those threads, I've also written a blog post on the subject.

Because such bugs won't stop coming in, and because the personnel on this committee may change and forget why we consistently have shot the idea down, I think it would be beneficial to add a paragraph to the specification document itself laying out why exactly we feel that parsing methods don't belong in ECMA-402.
@sffc sffc added s: discuss Status: TG2 must discuss to move forward c: meta Component: intl-wide issues labels Apr 2, 2020
@littledan
Copy link
Member

I've gotten this question lots of times too. Good to know about your blog post, so I can refer people to it in the future!

@sffc sffc added s: help wanted Status: help wanted; needs proposal champion and removed s: discuss Status: TG2 must discuss to move forward labels May 2, 2020
@sffc sffc added this to the ES 2021 milestone May 2, 2020
@ryzokuken
Copy link
Member

@sffc where do you think this note should go?

@sffc
Copy link
Contributor Author

sffc commented May 4, 2020

Add a paragraph in Section 4 "Overview", either underneath one of the existing headings, or under a new heading if it doesn't fit on any of the existing headings.

https://tc39.es/ecma402/#overview

@sffc sffc added editorial Involves an editorial fix s: in progress Status: the issue has an active proposal and removed s: help wanted Status: help wanted; needs proposal champion labels Jun 5, 2020
ryzokuken added a commit to ryzokuken/ecma402 that referenced this issue Jun 19, 2020
@ryzokuken
editorial: add note about parsing
81222b5 
Add a brief note to the specification about the reason for non-existence
of parsing functionality.

Fixes: tc39#424
@ryzokuken ryzokuken mentioned this issue Jun 19, 2020
Merged
gibson042 added a commit to gibson042/ecma402 that referenced this issue Mar 6, 2024
@gibson042
Editorial: Retarget the link explaining lack of parsers
2389c4c 
tc39gh-424 is more comprehensive than tc39gh-342, which is specific to DateTimeFormat
@gibson042 gibson042 mentioned this issue Mar 6, 2024
Merged
ryzokuken pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 7, 2024
@gibson042 @ryzokuken
Editorial: Retarget the link explaining lack of parsers
a1db456 
gh-424 is more comprehensive than gh-342, which is specific to DateTimeFormat
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@ryzokuken ryzokuken

Labels
c: meta Component: intl-wide issues editorial Involves an editorial fix s: in progress Status: the issue has an active proposal
Projects
None yet
Milestone
ES 2021
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

editorial: add note about parsing ryzokuken/ecma402
3 participants
@littledan @sffc @ryzokuken