I think the main reason to have a FormatComponent is to give each
DateTimeFormat instance a configuration state so that once you define it
you can "format" it automatically any time you print it out.
Said that, I am familiar as example with gmdate() PHP function or similar
"string syntax" as it could be "%.2f" for numbers and I agree these are
more handy and more "JavaScripysh" so that if ES.next won't have them, many
developers will try to add these shortcuts into Data.prototype object with
{writable:false,enumerable:false,configurable:false} descriptor.
This underlines one more time too much abstraction or engineering may
result into less practical usage for daily basis tasks.
+1 for Nicholas idea
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Nicholas Zakas <standa...@nczconsulting.com
> wrote:
> I've just been reviewing the internationalization spec:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1rsUxJQ03Ql6o3bh6RN7J81dtYZXE7OVsdQBw_h5ASnM&ndplr=1&pli=1
>
> First off - hooray! This is long, long, long overdue.
>
> The biggest question I have is with regards to the DateTimeFormat and
> NumberFormat. I'm wondering why you've chosen to have these as separate
> object types instead of adding methods onto Date.prototype and
> Number.prototype, respectively? It doesn't seem like having these as
> separate objects provides much more value since they mostly just use their
> format() methods.
>
> Smaller question is on specifying the format. The object literal
> specification of the format seems overly verbose for dates, and perhaps
> also for numbers. I'd really love to be able to do something like this:
>
> var now = Date();
> console.log(now.format("hh:mm:ss"));
>
> var price = 1010;
> console.log(price.format("#,###"));
>
> I'd hypothesize that most programmers are familiar with this type of
> date/numeric formatting strings as they are in use in other languages. I'd
> much prefer being able to use a formatting string vs. an object literal
> with multiple properties that aren't very transparent as to their
> consequence.
>
> Just to emphasize: I really like the functionality in the spec, it just
> seems more Java-like and verbose than what's in JavaScript right now, and
> I'm wondering if there are ways to change that.
>
> Thanks,
> Nicholas
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Nicholas C. Zakas
> http://www.nczonline.net
> @slicknet
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
