I wrote a similar test for Temporal.ZonedDateTime.p.toLocaleString, so
while this was fresh I decided to do the same for the other toLocaleString
calendar mismatch tests that were in staging.
In https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2522 which reached
consensus at the March 2023 TC39 meeting, the functionality of
Temporal.ZonedDateTime.p.toLocaleString was changed substantially, to not
directly pass the ZonedDateTime to any Intl.DateTimeFormat methods. This
adds rewrites of all existing tests for toLocaleString, as well as a few
tests to verify that Intl.DateTimeFormat methods no longer support
Temporal.ZonedDateTime arguments.
As we are rewriting the tests anyway, this also ports all of the
Temporal.ZonedDateTime.p.toLocaleString tests that were in staging, to the
correct format for the main tree.
Previously, "nested" calendar property bags were unwrapped up to one
level. That is, this object:
{
calendar: {
// ...Temporal.Calendar methods
}
}
would not be considered to implement the Calendar protocol, but would have
its calendar property used instead, if it were passed to an API that
required a Calendar protocol object.
These nested property bags are no longer supported. Discussion:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/issues/2104#issuecomment-1409549753
Corresponding normative PR:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2485
Previously, "nested" time zone property bags were unwrapped up to one
level. That is, this object:
{
timeZone: {
// ...Temporal.TimeZone methods
}
}
would not be considered to implement the TimeZone protocol, but would have
its timeZone property used instead, if it were passed to an API that
required a TimeZone protocol object.
These nested property bags are no longer supported. Discussion:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/issues/2104#issuecomment-1409549753
Corresponding normative PR:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2485
This is the replacement of the old API with the new API, .timeZoneId and
.getTimeZone(). Semantics will be corrected in the following commit.
Normative PR: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2482
Compare semantics for custom calendars that _don't_ extend
Temporal.Calendar (and therefore don't have the internal slot) use the
value of the .id property, instead of calling toString().
Normative PR: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2482
In several tests involving custom calendars, we need to change the
implementation of dateFromFields/monthDayFromFields/yearMonthFromFields so
that the returned object gets the receiver as its calendar after chaining
up to the builtin implementation.
Normative PR: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2482
The Temporal polyfill had a math bug in Calendar.p.dateUntil where
non-ISO calendars would unexpectedly throw when calculating
the number of years between two dates where the year were different,
the month codes were different, but the months were the same because
the earlier date's month was after a leap month.
This test validates the fix to this bug.
The Temporal polyfill had an infinite loop for non-ISO calendars
when Calendar.p.dateUntil was called to calculate the duration
between two identical dates. This test validates that PT0S is returned
in that case.
Tests for the process of calculating the reference ISO day for
Temporal.PlainYearMonth and the reference ISO year for
Temporal.PlainMonthDay.
Normative PR: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2475
In https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2474, which achieved
consensus at the TC39 plenary meeting of 2023-01-31, the implementation-
defined steps for Temporal.Calendar.prototype.mergeFields had their
language tightened, to better specify what implementations must do.
This adds tests covering the new spec language, and moves one related test
out of staging.
For each entry point where a string calendar name is accepted, we should
have a test that ensures the calendar name is case-insensitive. These
tests existed but several were incomplete as they didn't take nested
properties into account, and several entry points were missing this test.
Fix a minor copy-paste issue with double semicolons.
Following up on #3751 and #3762, this commit makes a few tests
work on both CLDR 42 and CLDR 41. Previously these tests were
tied to a specific CLDR 42 format.
While we're at it, use assert() instead of assert.sameValue() for brevity,
if we are not specifically testing that the return value of hasOwnProperty
is the value true or false; and add more informative assertion messages to
help with debugging.
In some cases, the Object.hasOwnProperty.call could be replaced with
verifyProperty(), if the property descriptor was also being verified at
the same time.
This fixes some tests that were faulty to begin with: a common mistake was
Object.hasOwnProperty(obj, prop) which is probably going to return false
when that's not what you want.
The only instances left of `Object.hasOwnProperty` are one regression test
in implementation-contributed which I can't tell if it was intentionally
needed to trigger the regression, and a few instances of
`Object.hasOwnProperty('prototype')` which would defeat the purpose to
convert into `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(Object, 'prototype')`
form.
Closes: #3524
As per the discussion in
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/issues/2379#issuecomment-1248557100
and the PR https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2398, which is
to be presented for consensus to TC39 in the upcoming plenary meeting, UTC
offsets and the Z designator should be disallowed after any date-only
strings (YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-MM, and MM-DD). They should only be allowed to
follow a time component. Z remains disallowed in any string being parsed
into a Plain type.
Annotations become allowed after any ISO string, even YYYY-MM and MM-DD
where they were previously disallowed.
To be presented for consensus in the November/December TC39 meeting. This
adds tests for a 'yearOfWeek' getter to PlainDate, PlainDateTime, and
ZonedDateTime, for use alongside 'weekOfYear', and tests for a
corresponding method to Calendar.
The tests are basically the existing tests of 'weekOfYear' adapted.
Temporal issue: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/issues/2405
I discovered these tests had omitted some arguments to the PlainDateTime
constructor, leaving the calendar in the wrong position.
The tests were technically not incorrect, since the operation
ToIntegerThrowOnInfinity on the string "gregory" gives 0. But they could
spuriously pass if the implementation didn't do argument conversion
correctly, failed to throw on eraYear being ±Infinity, but subsequently
threw RangeError anyway because the calendars of the arguments didn't
match.
Normally, a plain object passed into an API that takes a Temporal.Calendar
has its 'calendar' property checked (observably) with a Has operation
followed by a Get operation if the property is present. In the normative
change https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2392 which reached
consensus at the September 2022 TC39 meeting, this was changed so that
this check is skipped for objects which have the Temporal.Calendar
internal slots.
This adds tests to all entry points that pass a user-supplied object to
ToTemporalCalendar, with a "poisoned" calendar object which has the
correct internal slots but a 'calendar' accessor property whose getter
throws. A correct implementation should not cause this getter to throw.
In these tests, we should make a distinction in the name for clarity. It's
testing a time zone passed as a property in a property bag (either as an
argument, or as a relativeTo option), so name it accordingly as we do with
other tests in the same folder.
See https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2316 which eliminated
an observable call to Array.prototype[Symbol.iterator]() in the case where
a calendar's 'fields' property was undefined.
The best way I've thought of to test this is to monkeypatch the
Array.prototype[Symbol.iterator]() method to make it throw. In some cases,
where we are actually expected to iterate the return value from a
Temporal.TimeZone's getPossibleInstantsFor() method, we have to provide a
custom method for that as well, that returns a non-Array iterable so we
don't call the patched Array.prototype[Symbol.iterator]().
This normative change reached consensus at the July 2022 TC39 plenary
meeting.
See https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2397
Adds tests for ISO strings with more than one time zone annotation. These
are not syntactically correct according to the grammar and should be
rejected.
See https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/2397
Adds tests for ISO strings with unrecognized annotations, (i.e., neither
time zone nor calendar), in various combinations with recognized
annotations.
Aditi
Philip Chimento
Guillaume Emont
Frank Tang
Justin Grant
José Julián Espina
Richard Gibson
Romulo Cintra
Timothy Flynn
Ms2ger
André Bargull