Epoch Converter

[Julien L]

Unable to find a workflow that did just what I need, I finally bit the bullet and created my own.

It is released on Packal and GitHub.

 

It does 2 things:

• typing ts without any argument, it will display the current timestamp with different levels of precision;
• typing ts with a timestamp as an argument, it will display that timestamp in human-readable format, in both local and UTC timezones.

 

Any resulting value can be selected with enter, to copy it in the clipboard.

 

Let me know what you think:

• is this useful to anyone?
• is there anything missing?
• did I make a rookie mistake?

[mmoose68]

Thanks man!  Just installed it and it looks good so far!!

[Julien L]

I have just released the version 1.0.0 on GitHub. Packal is taking a bit longer to show the latest version.

The two main additions are:

• support converting a timestamp from the clipboard;
• support converting the other way (from human-readable to epoch timestamp).

 

I would love to hear feedback / suggestions / etc.

[deanishe]

7 hours ago, Julien L said:

I would love to hear feedback

 

What's going on in the screenshot? …3061… from the input becomes …3096… in the output.

[Julien L]

In the output, the first 2 lines with a CLOCK_ICON are the human-readable conversions of the timestamp parameter, in local and UTC times.

The other 4 lines are the "current time" as an epoch timestamp in multiple precisions.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Maybe this GIF helps illustrate:

[deanishe]

I understand what the workflow's supposed to do. I'm wondering, mathematically speaking, how it rounds up …30610… to …3096.

[Julien L]

It does not. There are two distinct timestamps involved in this timestamp:

 

• 1543323061042
  • that is 2018-11-27 13:51:01.42 in my timezone, or 2018-11-27 12:51:01.42 UTC
  • these are the first 2 options displayed, converting the timestamp that is passed as a parameter to the ts workflow
• 1543323096449
  • that is 2018-11-27 13:51:36.449 in my timezone, or 2018-11-27 12:51:36.449 UTC
  • these are the following 4 options displayed, completely unrelated to the timestamp that is passed as a parameter

I understand how it can be confusing, because I took the screenshot only 35 seconds after having copied the timestamp used as an example...

Hopefully the various GIFs in the current README are clearer than this single screenshot? Let me know if I should clarify anything.

[deanishe]

1 hour ago, Julien L said:

There are two distinct timestamps involved in this timestamp

 

This was what I hadn't understood. I thought that all the results were conversions of the entered timestamp, not an unrelated timestamp. Why do you also show the current timestamp when the user has entered their own timestamp?

[Julien L]

Quote

Why do you also show the current timestamp when the user has entered their own timestamp?

 

I thought that was the simplest / most straightforward / most obvious way; but I can see now how it gets confusing.

 

How is this proposal, then?

• ts
  • displays current epoch timestamp
  • displays current human-readable time
• ts <epoch timestamp>
  • displays only the converted human-readable time
• ts <human-readable time>
  • displays only the converted epoch timestamp

How should I handle the clipboard in that case?

Should the clipboard conversions display only when people type ts without parameter?

 

Thanks for thinking about this with me!

[deanishe]

1 hour ago, Julien L said:

I thought that was the simplest / most straightforward / most obvious way; but I can see now how it gets confusing.

 

I would say that as a rule, if the user has entered a query, almost all workflows will only show results related to that query.

 

It might just be me who finds it a little confusing, though.

 

1 hour ago, Julien L said:

How should I handle the clipboard in that case?

Should the clipboard conversions display only when people type ts without parameter?

 

Perhaps a separate trigger for the pasteboard? An extra "From Clipboard" item in the results if there's valid input on the clipboard? Accept the query "pb" or "cb" to parse the clipboard?

 

[giovanni]

I updated this to Python3 and created a pull request. cc @vitor