RFC 3339 Grammar Support

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RFC 3339 Grammar Support

Dexter Fryar
Is there any effort underway to provide parsePattern() support for the
formal grammar defined in RFC 3339?

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Joda-interest mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC 3339 Grammar Support

jodastephen
At a quick glance that just looks like ISO 8601, which is supported.
Have you found something that is not supported?
Stephen

On 29 November 2011 23:48, Dexter Fryar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Is there any effort underway to provide parsePattern() support for the
> formal grammar defined in RFC 3339?
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
> _______________________________________________
> Joda-interest mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Joda-interest mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC 3339 Grammar Support

Dexter Fryar
I wouldn't say ISO 8601 is unsupported. Only that in some cases the
grammar definitions would allow easier usage from external text
elements - from a config file for example. Similar to the pattern
syntax symbols/tokens, but in a less granular manner which would make
conditional parsing easier. It would also be less ambiguous since the
hierarchical definitions are explicit.

Appendix A. ISO 8601 Collected ABNF
  date-century
  ...
  period


config.file
  format=/var/log/date-year/date-month/date-mday

vs.

config.file
  format=/var/log/YY/MM/dd
  ...
  format=/var/log/YYYY/MM/dd


>From the application side you can enforce the tokens and do
substitution easier than char parsing. Log4j ConversionPattern, does
this from the properties file essentially doing the same thing Joda
does for char parsing.




On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Stephen Colebourne
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> At a quick glance that just looks like ISO 8601, which is supported.
> Have you found something that is not supported?
> Stephen
>
> On 29 November 2011 23:48, Dexter Fryar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Is there any effort underway to provide parsePattern() support for the
>> formal grammar defined in RFC 3339?
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
>> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
>> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
>> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Joda-interest mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
> _______________________________________________
> Joda-interest mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Joda-interest mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFC 3339 Grammar Support

jodastephen
OK, I understand now - a different format for defining formats!

There is no effort that I know of to do that, and I wouldn't see that
as being in core joda-Time. It would make a great small add-on project
though.

Stephen


On 30 November 2011 02:20, Dexter Fryar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I wouldn't say ISO 8601 is unsupported. Only that in some cases the
> grammar definitions would allow easier usage from external text
> elements - from a config file for example. Similar to the pattern
> syntax symbols/tokens, but in a less granular manner which would make
> conditional parsing easier. It would also be less ambiguous since the
> hierarchical definitions are explicit.
>
> Appendix A. ISO 8601 Collected ABNF
>  date-century
>  ...
>  period
>
>
> config.file
>  format=/var/log/date-year/date-month/date-mday
>
> vs.
>
> config.file
>  format=/var/log/YY/MM/dd
>  ...
>  format=/var/log/YYYY/MM/dd
>
>
> >From the application side you can enforce the tokens and do
> substitution easier than char parsing. Log4j ConversionPattern, does
> this from the properties file essentially doing the same thing Joda
> does for char parsing.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Stephen Colebourne
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> At a quick glance that just looks like ISO 8601, which is supported.
>> Have you found something that is not supported?
>> Stephen
>>
>> On 29 November 2011 23:48, Dexter Fryar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Is there any effort underway to provide parsePattern() support for the
>>> formal grammar defined in RFC 3339?
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
>>> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
>>> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
>>> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Joda-interest mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
>> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
>> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
>> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Joda-interest mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
> _______________________________________________
> Joda-interest mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cloud Services Checklist: Pricing and Packaging Optimization
This white paper is intended to serve as a reference, checklist and point of
discussion for anyone considering optimizing the pricing and packaging model
of a cloud services business. Read Now!
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51491232/
_______________________________________________
Joda-interest mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
Loading...