[ruby-core:111565] [Ruby master Bug#19293] The new Time.new(String) API is nice... but we still need a stricter version of this

Issue #19293 has been reported by matsuda (Akira Matsuda). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19293: The new Time.new(String) API is nice... but we still need a stricter version of this https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19293 * Author: matsuda (Akira Matsuda) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-01-01T07:39:00Z master 542e984d82) +YJIT [arm64-darwin21] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- The Ruby 3.2 style `Time.new(String)` API works very well so far, but since the original `Time.new(Integer, Integer, Integer...)` API actually accepts String objects as its arguments, there's one ambiguous case as follows: `Time.new('20230123') #=> 20230123-01-01 00:00:00 +0900` Then the problem that I'm facing is that we cannot tell if `Time.new` would parse the given String as ISO8601-ish or just a year, and in order to avoid this ambiguity, we still need to somehow parse the String beforehand in our application side (like we're doing this way in Ruby on Rails https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/c49b8270/activemodel/lib/active_model/t…), then dispatch to the new `Time.new` only when the String is validated to be conforming the ISO format. Otherwise, if we just optimistically pass in given Strings to `Time.new`, we'll occasionally get a Time object with an unintended buggy value. Therefore, it unfortunately seems that my feature request on #16005 still continues... I have to keep proposing that we need either of the following: 1. A trustworthy version of ISO8601 parser method perhaps with another name than `.new` that accepts strict ISO8601-ish String only (but with the T delimiter, I still don't know what the proper name of this format is). 2. Change `Time.new(Integer-ish, Integer-ish, Integer-ish...)` not to accept Integer-ish Strings but to accept only Integers. But I can imagine that this direction is very unlikely acceptable, due to the incompatibility. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/