Menu
Community /Pin to ProfileBookmark
@NogDogJan 22.2009 — #This seems to work:
@NogDogJan 22.2009 — #
Why? (I'm not saying either way is better or worse, just that neither is inherently so.)
Does this mean you are sure there will never be year, month, and/or week values in the duration string? (That's part of the reason I went to the contortions I did in order to differentiate the "M" for months and the "M" for minutes.) But if you're sure the fields will always be the same and you're happy with the result, then it should be fine. As one of the tenets of XP says, "Do the simplest thing that works," (and re-factor later as needed).@NogDogJan 23.2009 — #A mature language like PHP is generally pretty good at optimizing things when it compiles your code, so common things like foreach loops may be more efficient than you think. While you call preg_replace() once, it will have to do its own internal looping to go through each element of your search array. Now whether that is faster or slower I have no idea at this point, and most likely whichever way is faster in this particular instance is only going to be so in terms of very small units of time (e.g. probably measured in microseconds, which are [i]really[/i] small ? ). So I'd go with whatever (a) works and (b) is easiest for you to deal with now and a year from now when you need to update the code for some reason.
Best way to convert iso_8601 duration?
Hi Guys,
I was wondering what the best approach is to converting into a readable format a date/time duration that looks like this:
P1DT13H22M15S
It’s in [URL=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601″]iso_8601
Any number between T and H is the number of hours
Any number between H and M is minutes
Any number between M and S is seconds
Any number between P and D is number of days
and
P followed by T means the duration doesn’t include a day (is less than a day).
Is there anything in PHP that will do this conversion automatically? Otherwise, is preg_match the best option?
Can anyone suggest a regex? ?
Thanks!
Sign in
to post a comment8 Comments(s) ↴
0
@NogDogJan 22.2009 — #This seems to work:[code=php]
<?php
/**
* Parse an ISO 8601 duration string
* @return array
* @param string $str
**/
function parseDuration($str)
{
$result = array();
preg_match('/^(?:P)([^T]*)(?:T)?(.*)?$/', trim($str), $sections);
if(!empty($sections[1]))
{
preg_match_all('/(d+)([YMWD])/', $sections[1], $parts, PREG_SET_ORDER);
$units = array('Y' => 'years', 'M' => 'months', 'W' => 'weeks', 'D' => 'days');
foreach($parts as $part)
{
$result[$units[$part[2]]] = $part[1];
}
}
if(!empty($sections[2]))
{
preg_match_all('/(d+)([HMS])/', $sections[2], $parts, PREG_SET_ORDER);
$units = array('H' => 'hours', 'M' => 'minutes', 'S' => 'seconds');
foreach($parts as $part)
{
$result[$units[$part[2]]] = $part[1];
}
}
return($result);
}
?>
[/code]0
@NogDogJan 22.2009 — #I wanted to avoid using loops and conditional statements,...[/quote]
Why? (I'm not saying either way is better or worse, just that neither is inherently so.)
...so I tried this, which seems to work.
[CODE][/QUOTE]
$patterns[0] = '/P/';
$patterns[1] = '/PT/';
$patterns[2] = '/T/';
$patterns[3] = '/D/';
$patterns[4] = '/H/';
$patterns[5] = '/M/';
$patterns[6] = '/S/';
$replacements[0] = '';
$replacements[1] = '';
$replacements[2] = '';
$replacements[3] = ' days ';
$replacements[4] = ' hours ';
$replacements[5] = ' minutes ';
$replacements[6] = ' seconds ';
$time_left = preg_replace($patterns, $replacements, $duration);
[/CODE]
Does this mean you are sure there will never be year, month, and/or week values in the duration string? (That's part of the reason I went to the contortions I did in order to differentiate the "M" for months and the "M" for minutes.) But if you're sure the fields will always be the same and you're happy with the result, then it should be fine. As one of the tenets of XP says, "Do the simplest thing that works," (and re-factor later as needed).
0
@NogDogJan 23.2009 — #A mature language like PHP is generally pretty good at optimizing things when it compiles your code, so common things like foreach loops may be more efficient than you think. While you call preg_replace() once, it will have to do its own internal looping to go through each element of your search array. Now whether that is faster or slower I have no idea at this point, and most likely whichever way is faster in this particular instance is only going to be so in terms of very small units of time (e.g. probably measured in microseconds, which are [i]really[/i] small ? ). So I'd go with whatever (a) works and (b) is easiest for you to deal with now and a year from now when you need to update the code for some reason.