Bob@midwest.social to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agoEveryday, as an Americanmidwest.socialimagemessage-square322fedilinkarrow-up11.31Karrow-down146
arrow-up11.26Karrow-down1imageEveryday, as an Americanmidwest.socialBob@midwest.social to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agomessage-square322fedilink
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up3·5 months agoSome ISO8601 formats are good, but some are unreadable (like 20240607T054831Z for date and time).
minus-squarezqwzzlelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·5 months agoThe ones without separators tend to be for server/client exchange though.
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up2·5 months agoI agree but they’re hard to read at a glance when debugging and there’s lots of them :) Having said that, a lot of client-server communications use Unix timestamps though, which are even harder to read at a glance.
minus-squarezqwzzlelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-25 months agoAt least it’s human readable and not protobuf 😬 * though the transport channel doesn’t really matter it could be formatted this way anyhow.
minus-squareShardikprime@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·5 months agoI mean I like this one without the separations
ISO8601 gang
Represeeeeent!
Some ISO8601 formats are good, but some are unreadable (like 20240607T054831Z for date and time).
The ones without separators tend to be for server/client exchange though.
I agree but they’re hard to read at a glance when debugging and there’s lots of them :)
Having said that, a lot of client-server communications use Unix timestamps though, which are even harder to read at a glance.
At least it’s human readable and not protobuf 😬 * though the transport channel doesn’t really matter it could be formatted this way anyhow.
I mean I like this one without the separations