Issue #13072 has been updated by Marcus Stollsteimer.


> date library will be separeted from Ruby repository (stdlib) to date.gem

I think the concept of date (without time) is so important that it should not simply be unbundled into a gem.

I'm concerned about the increasing tendency to unbundle core functionality, and fear that Ruby will loose some of its usability and attractiveness as an all-purpose language, especially for simple, easy to distribute, single-file scripts for e.g. administrative tasks, text processing, or data analysis.

Please keep in mind that installing gems is not always that easy, for instance without root access or on non-Unix-like operating systems -- even more so for native gems. _[Please forgive the (partial) double posting with #13221.]_

The current situation with Time, Date, DateTime is indeed confusing, but instead of removing `date` offhandedly please try to find a solution where the core functionality is kept _somewhere_ in the stdlib (not necessarily where it is now).

----------------------------------------
Misc #13072: Current state of date standard library
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13072#change-63026

* Author: Victor Shepelev
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
The facts that I've been able to gather (not supported by links, so please forgive me if I am misquoting/misunderstanding):

* date library was initially developed and maintained by Tadayoshi Funaba, who was the "single point of truth" for its design and features;
* for at least year, initial creator/maintainer of the library is inactive in Ruby community, so library mostly considered unmaintained;
* as far as I can "sense"/guess from ticket responses about the library, the core team doesn't see it as crucial/important to maintain.

At the same time, the library provides:

* Widely and extensively used `Date` class;
* Pretty controversial `DateTime` class, which has a huge feature intersection but almost no compatibility with core `Time` class;
* Date parsing functionality (`Date._parse`), which is also used by `lib/time`.

The latter also leads to a really confusing situation, where one of the core Ruby classes has "optional additional functionality" in stdlib.

Overall, the situation looks pretty "dirty" (as in "dirty code"), and seems like needing improvement.

WDYT about this plan (for Ruby 2.5, for ex.):

* make `Date` and `Date._parse` parts of language core (with probably renaming `_parse` to something more readable, or even extracting something like `Date::Parser` module);
* merge `DateTime` and `Time` (while preferring `Time`s interface where possible);
* on the way, gather all requests/bugs from this tracker, related to dates and times parsing, representing and so on.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>