Open
Conversation
Author
|
There is also #465 which is a bigger change that addresses the same issue, but it has been in limbo for a while. I will close this PR if that one is preferable. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Changes proposed in this pull request:
%xto mean%m/%d/%yto match Lua (https://www.lua.org/pil/22.1.html) (before this PR it was%H/%M/%SI assume by mistake)While writing the test I also noticed a few other date formatting codes that don't exactly match what Lua does:
%pis "PM" ("pm" in Lua)%cis "02 Jan 06 15:04 MST" ("Mon Jan 2 15:04:05 2006" in Lua)I decided to not include them in the test. I also left formatting codes that are not documented on lua.org untested.
The issue was first reported in micro: micro-editor/micro#4067