Merged
Conversation
ptomato
requested review from
Ms2ger,
gibson042,
jasonwilliams,
justingrant,
pipobscure,
ryzokuken and
sffc
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #811 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 92.74% 92.89% +0.15%
==========================================
Files 17 17
Lines 4881 5055 +174
Branches 754 773 +19
==========================================
+ Hits 4527 4696 +169
- Misses 347 352 +5
Partials 7 7
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
justingrant
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
Collaborator
|
Nice! I left a few comments, mostly on the docs. Nothing major. I didn't dig deeply into the polyfill implementation or the specs. It's nice to see how much simpler a few of the cookbook samples got with negative durations. Thanks for doing this-- huge improvement! |
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
from
c7fd2d9 to
5df5d82
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
Thanks for the reviews! There were definitely some good catches in there. |
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
from
5df5d82 to
51a801c
Compare
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
from
51a801c to
05a2b14
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
This now requires #826. |
ryzokuken
reviewed
Aug 17, 2020
Member
ryzokuken
left a comment
ryzokuken
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Partially reviewed, and wow, it's huge.
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
from
84bed92 to
9d9326a
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
Thanks for the review, definitely caught some stuff I didn't see! I believe it's ready for review again. |
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
2 times, most recently
from
da69c47 to
cebc5f6
Compare
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2944709 to
ebd4aa0
Compare
sffc
reviewed
Aug 28, 2020
Collaborator
sffc
left a comment
sffc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks good from spot-checking, but I didn't do a thorough review.
ryzokuken
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2020
| <emu-clause id="sec-temporal-durationsign" aoid="DurationSign"> | ||
| <h1>DurationSign ( _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_ )</h1> | ||
| <emu-alg> | ||
| 1. For each value _v_ of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, do |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| 1. For each value _v_ of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, do | |
| 1. For each value _v_ of « _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_ », do |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what the correct spec language is, but there seems to be a precedent for not using the angle brackets: https://tc39.es/ecma402/#sec-todatetimeoptions
| <h1>RejectDurationSign ( _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_ )</h1> | ||
| <emu-alg> | ||
| 1. Let _sign_ be ! DurationSign(_years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_). | ||
| 1. For each value _v_ of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, do |
| <emu-alg> | ||
| 1. For each of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, if any of the values is negative or infinite, return *false*. | ||
| 1. Let _sign_ be ! DurationSign(_years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_). | ||
| 1. For each value _v_ of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, do |
| 1. Else if _disambiguation_ is *"constrain"*, then | ||
| 1. For each of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, if any of the values is negative, throw a *RangeError* exception. | ||
| 1. For each of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, if any of the values is infinite, let it be the largest possible finite value of the Number type. | ||
| 1. For each of _years_, _months_, _weeks_, _days_, _hours_, _minutes_, _seconds_, _milliseconds_, _microseconds_, _nanoseconds_, if any of the values is infinite, let it be the sign of that value times the largest possible finite value of the Number type. |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does the last comment apply here too? Not sure, but maybe.
It's odd that we have AddTime but not SubtractTime. Regardless, we'll need to have it as a separate operation since it will be used from two places for negative duration support.
Changes Temporal.Duration to allow negative values in the fields, as long as all the fields have the same sign. Adds negated() and abs() methods to Temporal.Duration, and a sign property. On all types with arithmetic, subtracting a negative duration is equivalent to adding the absolute value of that duration, and adding a negative duration is equivalent to subtracting the absolute value of that duration. Closes: #782
This undoes the work in commit d84653e although it's not exactly a revert, because the situation before that was that durations were always positive. We also don't reinstate the behaviour of never returning a duration larger than 12 hours. Now, for all types, calling smaller.difference(larger) will result in a negative duration. See: #782
ptomato
force-pushed
the
782-negative-duration
branch
from
ebd4aa0 to
93c64e2
Compare
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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.
This is a huge pull request; I'd suggest reviewing it commit by commit.
The first two commits are small unrelated fixes. The third is a small rearrangement. The fourth actually allows negative durations, but the difference() methods still throw if called on two objects in the wrong order. The fifth commit fixes that and allows all the difference() methods to return negative durations.
Closes: #558
Closes: #782
Closes: #645