iamkun / iamkun/dayjs

dayjs.tz vs dayjs().tz functionality difference is confusing

Open
#1,758 2 comments 8 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
Dominant language
JavaScript
Stars
48.7k
Forks
2.5k
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

**Describe the bug**
Using `dayjs.tz(date, timezone)` and `dayjs(date).tz(timezone)` produce different results when the passed date string has a timezone offset defined but the same result when there is no timezone defined

See the following code:
```js
const dayjs = require('dayjs')
const utc = require('dayjs/plugin/utc')
const timezone = require('dayjs/plugin/timezone')
dayjs.extend(utc)
dayjs.extend(timezone)

dayjs.tz('2015-06-23T00:45:33+00:00', 'America/New_York').format() === dayjs('2015-06-23T00:45:33+00:00').tz('America/
New_York').format() //returns false

dayjs.tz('2015-06-23T00:45:33', 'America/New_York').format() === dayjs('2015-06-23T00:45:33').tz('America/
New_York').format() //returns true
```

**Expected behavior**
I would expect the behavior of `dayjs.tz` and `dayjs().tz` to be the same in this case

**Information**
- Day.js Version ^1.10.6
- OS: Windows 10
- Browser Chrome 96
- Time zone: Eastern Standard Time (GMT-05:00)

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Research direction

Start by running the provided reproduction with the utc and timezone plugins, comparing dayjs.tz(date, timezone) with dayjs(date).tz(timezone) for strings with and without an offset. Read the utc and timezone plugin entry points to trace the differing parsing paths. Done means the two entry points have consistent results for both examples, with regression coverage for the offset case.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
javascript
Domain
web-dev
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
45/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.