Eric Sheppard

There are quite a few attached to the `0.5` milestone as well, including: Blocking: * Timezone system changes (#750, #830, #749, #716) * Remove old duration references, timedelta (after #895...

This could potentially target `0.4.x` but that would preclude some of the API changes like the new `impl Sub` return type

Actually, upon re-reading this, I think the only thing I'd have to change is to leave `Days::new` taking a `u64`, then this would be ok in `0.4.x`

Fair call - the main idea here is to have a proper return type for things like `my_date.days_since(my_other_date)` - where we want to use the existing `Days` type, but the...

This sounds reasonable to me. From the implementation, the only time `*Delta` is useful is when you have two datetimes/times and you want to get the difference in duration between...

Had another thought of just using `Result` for this - what do you think? (with a similar pattern in https://github.com/chronotope/chrono/pull/860)

This was originally combined with the work in https://github.com/chronotope/chrono/pull/860/commits/d086ca9b1d48fba9fa570ed15bbd3e880b0619e8 and in the implementations of `signed_duration_since` which is infallible, a `u32` is much more convenient to work with than a `u64`,...

Thanks for raising this @kornelski. Some of the solutions I've suggested in #831 probably apply here as well, but its worth going through a few of these points to explain...

one option using the existing code would be: ```rust use chrono::format::{Item, strftime::StrftimeItems}; let valid = !Strftimeitems().any(|i| matches!(i, Item::Error)); ``` If you wanted to get the items themselves while also doing...