From: samuel@... Date: 2021-07-09T06:30:40+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:104554] [Ruby master Feature#18033] Time.new to parse a string Issue #18033 has been updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). It looks like good improvement. But does any other `#new` implementation work this way? Can we fix `Time#parse`? I wonder if user will be confused, should they use `Time.parse` or `Time.new`? Why is `Time.parse` so slow? This seems like a good performance improvement. But rather than fixing the existing `#parse`, we introduce new one. Now we move the complexity to the user. ---------------------------------------- Feature #18033: Time.new to parse a string https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18033#change-92833 * Author: nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- Make `Time.new` parse `Time#inspect` and ISO-8601 like strings. * `Time.iso8601` and `Time.parse` need an extension library, `date`. * `Time.iso8601` can't parse `Time#inspect` string. * `Time.parse` often results in unintentional/surprising results. * `Time.new` also about 1.9 times faster than `Time.iso8601`. ``` $ ./ruby -rtime -rbenchmark -e ' n = 1000 s = Time.now.iso8601 Benchmark.bm(12) do |x| x.report("Time.iso8601") {n.times{Time.iso8601(s)}} x.report("Time.parse") {n.times{Time.parse(s)}} x.report("Time.new") {n.times{Time.new(s)}} end' user system total real Time.iso8601 0.006919 0.000185 0.007104 ( 0.007091) Time.parse 0.018338 0.000207 0.018545 ( 0.018590) Time.new 0.003671 0.000069 0.003740 ( 0.003741) ``` https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/4639 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: