date

> but I'd be surprised if there was not a modern date library for C++ The standard library now includes <chrono>. AFAIK: It was mostly written by Howard Hinnant. He now has more date/time libs that expand upon <chrono>: https://github.com/HowardHinnant/date

C++20 adds the timezone/caldendaring/formatting from Howard Hinnat’s Date Library https://github.com/howardhinnant/date . So calendrical calculations and time zone support.

In Java, Joda-Time was a third party library for ages. It was the dominant date-time lib for enterprise development. Then, it was standardised and added to the stdlib: java.time (JSR-310). The Joda-Time project lead, Stephen Colebourne, ran the standardisation process. It was well received by most, even the breaking API changes that SC was adamant were flaws in the original Joda-Time API. I can vouch for it: Both Joda-Time and the java.time libs are excellent. (In my job, I regularly need to perform complex date-time transformations, including time zones.) I have also used Howard Hinnant's C++ date-time lib: https://github.com/HowardHinnant/date It is also very good. (He was the guy behind move semantics in C++ 11.) In Python, the stdlib has a function to get UTC now, that does not include UTC timezone... so it weirdly and surpris

I'm not sure how I feel about operator overloading. It starts out simple enough, but can lead to extremely confusing code. Take this snippet of an API call[1] that parses ISO strings to chrono::time_point using date[2]: std::istringstream in(iso_string); in >> date::parse("%FT%TZ", tp); At first glace my brain cannot comprehend the second statement. Why is there an input stream going into a function? Is that even valid C++? Why not just pass `in` as a function parameter and return time_point as the return value?? When you actually dig into the source, it's a namespace overloaded operator and it's extremely heavily templated to be generic. So now if I think of `>>` as simply a second function call using the result of `date::parse` it makes sense, but... I still don't understand all of the technical reasons behind that decision. I