Skip to content

Fix CalendarDateArithmeticYear and make it take an ISO Date Record #68

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 29, 2025

Conversation

sffc
Copy link
Collaborator

@sffc sffc commented Jul 25, 2025

Just a small bug I noticed today.

The current text doesn't work when there are two new calendar years in the same ISO year, which can happen in Hijri, for example.

I also made the AO take an ISO Date Record so that I can use it in some of the other AOs I'm writing.

@sffc sffc requested a review from ptomato July 25, 2025 21:29
Copy link
Member

@ryzokuken ryzokuken left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but remember to build the spec and add the biblio entry for https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/#sec-temporal-iso-date-records

@sffc sffc force-pushed the refactor-CalendarDateArithmeticYear branch from 5e81cfa to 841e187 Compare July 29, 2025 05:29
@sffc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sffc commented Jul 29, 2025

The following line is already in biblio.json:

            {
                "type": "term",
                "term": "ISO Date Record",
                "id": "sec-temporal-iso-date-records"
            },

@sffc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sffc commented Jul 29, 2025

I'm going to merge based on @ryzokuken's approval in order to prevent bitrot. If @ptomato sees anything else, I'll fix in a follow-up.

@sffc sffc merged commit e548740 into tc39:main Jul 29, 2025
@sffc sffc deleted the refactor-CalendarDateArithmeticYear branch July 29, 2025 05:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants