Stricter DateTime types
#6161
Merged
Stricter DateTime types
#6161
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
derrabus
force-pushed
the
improvement/stricter-datetime
branch
from
16e4b01 to
95b6e7b
Compare
greg0ire
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
The following types don't accept or return
DateTimeImmutableinstances anymore:DateTimeTypeDateTimeTzTypeDateTypeTimeTypeVarDateTimeTypeAs a consequence, the following type classes don't extend their mutable
counterparts anymore:
DateTimeImmutableTypeDateTimeTzImmutableTypeDateImmutableTypeTimeImmutableTypeVarDateTimeImmutableType