5 ms·

It’s almost a shame, considering all the effort that went into Moment and Luxon, which will largely be superseded. Luxon especially is a joy to work with.

lxgr 2y ago
Another way of viewing this would be that these and other implementations have paved the way for standardization, which would possibly never have happened without them.
SkyBelow 2y ago
I spent a day fighting with date-fns trying to get some date calculations working and was to the point I was questioning if my entire approach was flawed because there was no reason I should be spending that much time figuring our some simple date calculations. Eventually I decided to try swapping to Luxon. 30 minutes later and it was all working. I'm still guessing I misunderstood something fundamental about date-fns, but for now I'm advocating for Luxon.
- Macha 2y ago
  For the longest time date-fns approach to timezones was "Do you really need timezones? Aren't UTC offsets enough?" which was pretty fatal for a date time library, no matter how simple and light it makes your bundle. It looks like they did finally launch TZ support in September last year, and I haven't investigated it (and probably never will, given Temporal is coming a Temporal polyfill seems a better option)
  - agos 2y ago
    date-fn's gaslighting on timezones was so weird. I now see that they're planning duration support, but it's clear that its usefulness is fading
icambron 2y ago
Luxon author here. Obviously I (and many others!) put a lot into Luxon, but only because it seemed so useful. Now that it's hopefully becoming obsolete, I get to look at it fondly as a nice bridge to the future, and I appreciate all the love it's gotten. All things end.
agos 2y ago
IIRC Luxon doesn't have the concept of Calendar/Naive date/time, which is one of the major improvements brought by Temporal for me

lxgr 2y ago

Another way of viewing this would be that these and other implementations have paved the way for standardization, which would possibly never have happened without them.

SkyBelow 2y ago

I spent a day fighting with date-fns trying to get some date calculations working and was to the point I was questioning if my entire approach was flawed because there was no reason I should be spending that much time figuring our some simple date calculations. Eventually I decided to try swapping to Luxon. 30 minutes later and it was all working. I'm still guessing I misunderstood something fundamental about date-fns, but for now I'm advocating for Luxon.

Macha 2y ago
For the longest time date-fns approach to timezones was "Do you really need timezones? Aren't UTC offsets enough?" which was pretty fatal for a date time library, no matter how simple and light it makes your bundle. It looks like they did finally launch TZ support in September last year, and I haven't investigated it (and probably never will, given Temporal is coming a Temporal polyfill seems a better option)
- agos 2y ago
  date-fn's gaslighting on timezones was so weird. I now see that they're planning duration support, but it's clear that its usefulness is fading

icambron 2y ago

Luxon author here. Obviously I (and many others!) put a lot into Luxon, but only because it seemed so useful. Now that it's hopefully becoming obsolete, I get to look at it fondly as a nice bridge to the future, and I appreciate all the love it's gotten. All things end.

agos 2y ago

IIRC Luxon doesn't have the concept of Calendar/Naive date/time, which is one of the major improvements brought by Temporal for me