@movq@www.uninformativ.de Yeah, that would also be fine with me. I certainly do like the “arbitrary” in your comment.
While writing the article, I also thought about something like that:
date := time.Date(2026, 6, 19,
17, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)
Or possibly:
date := time.Date(
2026, 6, 19,
17, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC,
)
But it’s four lines for a damn timestamp. I also contemplated whether a comment acting as a separator is all that’s needed:
date := time.Date(2026, 6, 19, /**/ 17, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)
I might like that the most. Not entirely sure yet. It kinda feels like a hack, but still a little elegant. Add your comment on top and we’re golden. Maybe?
I deliberately excluded them as this only distracted from the points I wanted to make. And I also realized that this example was just not ideal at all. Perhaps I should add them nevertheless?
If I ever invented a programming language, a much more human readable timestamp representation of some sort, RFC 3339 or very close to that would be part of that language. Something along the lines of /pattern/ for regexes in certain languages.