You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Chalten seems to sidestep the terrible Pharo TZ bug for Dates, because its dates are abstract and not implemented via timestamps. However, it seems to suffer from the same bug with times, which, while at least having the ability to refer to timezones by name, still have the amorphous 'local timezone' concept. The crux of the problem is that the correct offset for a created e.g. DateTime needs to be the offset on the created date, whereas in Pharo/Chalten the offset is set to the today's offset. These can be different since the local TZ offset may vary due to DST. So if DST is in effect now, but not on the created date, the offset will be wrong. I don't see an easy way to resolve this bug and feel strongly that if timezones can't be implemented correctly, they shouldn't be enabled at all by default. See here for a fuller description of the problem.
Any ideas?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Chalten seems to sidestep the terrible Pharo TZ bug for Dates, because its dates are abstract and not implemented via timestamps. However, it seems to suffer from the same bug with times, which, while at least having the ability to refer to timezones by name, still have the amorphous 'local timezone' concept. The crux of the problem is that the correct offset for a created e.g. DateTime needs to be the offset on the created date, whereas in Pharo/Chalten the offset is set to the today's offset. These can be different since the local TZ offset may vary due to DST. So if DST is in effect now, but not on the created date, the offset will be wrong. I don't see an easy way to resolve this bug and feel strongly that if timezones can't be implemented correctly, they shouldn't be enabled at all by default. See here for a fuller description of the problem.
Any ideas?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: