1648139 - Implement Intl.DurationFormat

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: JavaScript: Internationalization API, enhancement, P3)

Description

[Yulia Startsev [:yulia] OOO until July 2026]

Intl.durationFormat is at stage 2

Comment 1

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: WIP: Bug 1648139 - Part 1: Add "microseconds" and "nanoseconds" duration units to the ICU data file.

"microseconds" and "nanoseconds" aren't sanctioned units for Intl.NumberFormat,
so we know have to differentiate between supported and sanctioned units.

Comment 2

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 1: Add DateTimeFormat::GetTimeSeparator(). r=#platform-i18n-reviewers!

ICU doesn't provide a public API to retrieve the time separator, so we have
to read it manually from the resource bundles.

Depends on D152743

Comment 3

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 2: Implement Intl.DurationFormat constructor. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Implements the Intl.DurationFormat constructor, including the
resolvedOptions() and supportedLocalesOf() methods.

Depends on D152744

Comment 4

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 3: Implement Intl.DurationFormat.prototype.format[ToParts]. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Depends on D152745

Comment 5

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 4: Add tests for Intl.DurationFormat. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Depends on D152746

Comment 6

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 5: Enable test262 tests for Intl.DurationFormat. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Depends on D152747

Comment 7

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 6: Re-import test262 to enable Intl.DurationFormat tests. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Depends on D152748

Comment 8

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Attachment: Bug 1648139 - Part 7: Update Intl.DurationFormat test262 exclusions. r=#spidermonkey-reviewers!

Depends on D152749

Comment 9

[André Bargull [:anba]]

The proposal has been decoupled from Temporal, so this bug no longer depends on bug 1519167.

The proposal itself is at stage 3, but there are still multiple open issues which may require a different implementation approach, e.g. formatToParts is likely to change, see https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/55. So maybe we should wait a bit longer until the major open issues have been resolved.

When writing the patches, I had to resort to hacks at two points:

1. Formatting microseconds and nanoseconds units through Intl.NumberFormat isn't currently possible, so I had to bypass the check for valid unit identifiers. https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/702 should help to avoid this hack.
2. I had to be creative in formatToParts when digital formatting is used (e.g. "02:00:00.123"). The aforementioned formatToParts changes may require more hacks around Intl.ListFormat.

Comment 10

[André Bargull [:anba]]

I've updated the WIP patches to match the current spec proposal text. Not quite yet ready for review, because there are still some open PRs which should land first.

Comment 11

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

There was an update about this proposal in the ECMA-402 meeting today. Ujjwal thinks that the remaining issues have been addressed that would block implementation here. Anba, does that sound right to you? Is there any feedback you'd like me to share with TG2?

Comment 12

[André Bargull [:anba]]

I can look into it. DurationFormat requires NumberFormat v3, which is currently only available in Nightly. I've prepared some patches to enable it by default, but realised too late that you're already assigned to bug 1795756. I hope you don't mind me stealing that bug.

Comment 13

[André Bargull [:anba]]

(In reply to Dan Minor [:dminor] from comment #11)

Ujjwal thinks that the remaining issues have been addressed that would block implementation here. Anba, does that sound right to you? Is there any feedback you'd like me to share with TG2?

I've filed the following issues on the proposal bug tracker:

• Editorial: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/151
• Editorial: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/152
• Editorial: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/154
• Normative: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/155
• Normative: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/156
• Normative: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/issues/157

In addition to that, there are the following open PRs:

• Normative: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/pull/150
  • I've found two issues with the current PR.
• Editorial: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/pull/134 and https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-duration-format/pull/143
  • The PartitionDurationFormatPattern abstract operation isn't quite correct, the two PRs aim to fix it in different ways. For example when strictly following the current PartitionDurationFormatPattern definition, formatting {hours:12, minutes:30, seconds:45} with the "digital" style returns the string "12, :, 30, :, & 45" instead of "12:30:45". So we have to guess/interpret how the abstract operation should have been defined. This isn't strictly a blocker for implementations, but definitely a blocker for stage 4.

Comment 14

[Dan Minor [:dminor]]

Hi Anba, it looks like the issues and PRs above have been addressed (or at least closed...) This is on the agenda for the TC39 plenary next week, do you have any concerns about the proposal as it currently stands?

Comment 15

[André Bargull [:anba]]

I haven't kept track of the proposal. There were multiple larger refactorings since January, so I don't really know the current state of the proposal. It's possible that new bugs crept in as part of these changes, which may require more follow-up fixes. Hopefully this will all be editorial, but it's possible that more normative changes will be necessary.

Comment 16

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/123880a450b9
Part 1: Add DateTimeFormat::GetTimeSeparator(). r=platform-i18n-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/05549eed8b9d
Part 2: Implement Intl.DurationFormat constructor. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/702c752df5a2
Part 3: Implement Intl.DurationFormat.prototype.format[ToParts]. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/adf12e0fd8d1
Part 4: Add tests for Intl.DurationFormat. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/bdb228dd5915
Part 5: Enable test262 tests for Intl.DurationFormat. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/8d36bf883a70
Part 6: Re-import test262 to enable Intl.DurationFormat tests. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/96fcefa9a41a
Part 7: Update Intl.DurationFormat test262 exclusions. r=spidermonkey-reviewers,dminor

Comment 17

[Sandor Molnar[:smolnar]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/123880a450b9
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/05549eed8b9d
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/702c752df5a2
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/adf12e0fd8d1
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/bdb228dd5915
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/8d36bf883a70
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/96fcefa9a41a

Comment 18

[Hamish Willee]

FF134 MDN docs work for this can be tracked in https://github.com/mdn/content/issues/36917

1. Is this also shipped? I can't see evidence of a preference, but that isn't always obvious is JS issues.
2. As far as you know, is it fully spec compliant and complete? This is documented on MDN, but I will check that matches the spec - want to also check that it matches what FF did.

Comment 19

[André Bargull [:anba]]

(In reply to Hamish Willee from comment #18)

1. Is this also shipped? I can't see evidence of a preference, but that isn't always obvious is JS issues.

It's currently restricted to Nightly builds.

2. As far as you know, is it fully spec compliant and complete? This is documented on MDN, but I will check that matches the spec - want to also check that it matches what FF did.

Yes, the implementation is fully spec compliant and complete.

Comment 20

[Alexandre Folle de Menezes]

Proposal advanced to Stage 4.