Bob@midwest.social to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agoEveryday, as an Americanmidwest.socialimagemessage-square196fedilinkarrow-up1937arrow-down139
arrow-up1898arrow-down1imageEveryday, as an Americanmidwest.socialBob@midwest.social to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square196fedilink
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month agoSome ISO8601 formats are good, but some are unreadable (like 20240607T054831Z for date and time).
minus-squarezqwzzle@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 month agoThe ones without separators tend to be for server/client exchange though.
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month 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-squarezqwzzle@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-229 days 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-up2·1 month agoI mean I like this one without the separations
ISO8601 gang
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