On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Lukas Eder <[email protected]> wrote: > The issue here seems to be related to the fact that the offset is of the > form +0:00 rather than +00:00. It's a shame that JSR 310 parsing is so > strict, but we can certainly work around this issue in jOOQ. I have > registered #4965 for this: > https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/4965
If I tried tried to calculate the percentage of my career that I've spent fixing time zone issues, that code itself would most likely have a date/time arithmetic bug in it :-( > > Thanks again for reporting all of these things. I wish jOOQ could already > offer more out-of-the-box help here with these data types. It shouldn't be > so hard to integrate them as it is, right now. I think the holy grail API-wise would be to have a greater ability to tweak/override the default bindings when one comes across this kind of thing. That said, I not sure what the right API design should be. If you expose stuff such that people can subclass default implementations, I can imagine that you will find yourself having to break more apps as you evolve the default libraries. Tricky. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
