Comment by austin-cheney

Comment by austin-cheney 19 hours ago

The article is super weird. It never mentions Date.now(). It dances around the subject and exhaustively mentions the equivalent convention for Temporal.

If you want Date to act like Temporal then only use Date.now() as your starting point. It generates the number of milliseconds since 1 Jan 1970. That means the starting output is a number type in integer form. It does not represent a static value, but rather the distance between now and some universal point in the past, a relationship. Yes, Temporal is a more friendly API, but the primary design goal is to represent time as a relational factor.

Then you can format the Date.now() number it into whatever other format you want.

ffsm8 18 hours ago

the article has examples of unexpected behavior with timestamps too, so... How do you covert to your desired format without going through Date? Please don't say date-fns

Reply View 2 replies

austin-cheney 5 hours ago

I do not believe you understood the comment you replied to. A date number, whether from Date.now() or the Temporal equivalent, is not a time stamp value. It’s just a number.

Reply View | 1 reply
- ffsm8 4 hours ago
  
  Then I do not believe you understood the article you've commented on, because it essentially about the thing you handwaved away via
  > Then you can format the Date.now() number it into whatever other format you want.
  The while thing is about how to transition from a date, wherever it's string or timestamp to a date object. The idea is that you'll either format it to a string, do equality checks, calculate durations etc after after. Your idea of using timestamps doesn't address anything the article was about
  
  Reply View | 0 replies