Set collection doesn't always enforce uniqueness with the Date datatype? Does the following example seem correct?Apex Test not updating parent object field based on child object formula fieldsschema.getglobaldescribe needs test classCode Coverage to Test Custom Object Public Listturn an APEX trigger into scheduled batch updateSalesforce Cookbook - Last Chatter Date - Works MOST Of The TimeIs it strange to declare a collection (Set) with the final keyword as described above?Salesforce Contracts - Testing on Contract term/End DateHaving trouble with a date/time get;set;

How do I make a function that generates nth natural number that isn't a perfect square?

Upside-Down Pyramid Addition...REVERSED!

How to apply differences on part of a list and keep the rest

Fitch Proof Question

Make some Prime Squares!

Why was the battle set up *outside* Winterfell?

How wide is a neg symbol, how to get the width for alignment?

What to use instead of cling film to wrap pastry

Building a list of products from the elements in another list

What was the design of the Macintosh II's MMU replacement?

Multi-channel audio upsampling interpolation

How can I close a gap between my fence and my neighbor's that's on his side of the property line?

Send iMessage from Firefox

On which topic did Indiana Jones write his doctoral thesis?

What are the differences between credential stuffing and password spraying?

Why do people keep telling me that I am a bad photographer?

Prove that the limit exists or does not exist

Why is B♯ higher than C♭ in 31-ET?

If your medical expenses exceed your income does the IRS pay you?

Did we get closer to another plane than we were supposed to, or was the pilot just protecting our delicate sensibilities?

Missing Piece of Pie - Can you find it?

Position of past participle and extent of the Verbklammer

How does this change to the opportunity attack rule impact combat?

What property of a BJT transistor makes it an amplifier?



Set collection doesn't always enforce uniqueness with the Date datatype? Does the following example seem correct?


Apex Test not updating parent object field based on child object formula fieldsschema.getglobaldescribe needs test classCode Coverage to Test Custom Object Public Listturn an APEX trigger into scheduled batch updateSalesforce Cookbook - Last Chatter Date - Works MOST Of The TimeIs it strange to declare a collection (Set) with the final keyword as described above?Salesforce Contracts - Testing on Contract term/End DateHaving trouble with a date/time get;set;






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








5















Consider the following unit test:



@istest
public static void datetests2()
Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
dts.add(DateTime.now().Date());
dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(1).Date());
dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(2).Date());
system.debug(dts);

system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



The result, as I'm sure you'd expect would be that the test would pass. The debug statement showing something like:



14:49:36:002 USER_DEBUG [22]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 00:00:00


Now consider this very similar unit test:



@istest
public static void datetests()
Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now()));
dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(1)));
dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(2)));
system.debug(dts);

system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



You would expect it to pass. Well, I did. But in fact, it fails.



14:57:10:001 FATAL_ERROR System.AssertException: Assertion Failed: Expected: 1, Actual: 3


Displaying something like:



14:57:10:001 USER_DEBUG [10]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 09:00:00, 2019-05-01 10:00:00, 2019-05-01 11:00:00


Now, part of why this may be happening is clear - While logic suggests that Date.ValueOf returns a date, it actually seems to return a DateTime (which contradicts the docs, but whatever...)



In anonymous Apex:



system.debug(Date.ValueOf(DateTime.now()));


Returns at the moment:



15:00:24:002 USER_DEBUG [1]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 10:00:00


which is a datetime



But you'd really expect Set to enforce uniqueness across dates regardless, right?



I've searched online, known issues, etc. and didn't find anything obvious. I confess this completely caught me by surprise.



So my question are:



  1. Can you reproduce this?

  2. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?

  3. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?

  4. Any other thoughts or ideas?

Note - this testing is on a fresh SFDX scratch org running Spring 19 API 45. I did run the unit tests at API 40 just to make sure it wasn't a version artifact.










share|improve this question






























    5















    Consider the following unit test:



    @istest
    public static void datetests2()
    Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
    dts.add(DateTime.now().Date());
    dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(1).Date());
    dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(2).Date());
    system.debug(dts);

    system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



    The result, as I'm sure you'd expect would be that the test would pass. The debug statement showing something like:



    14:49:36:002 USER_DEBUG [22]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 00:00:00


    Now consider this very similar unit test:



    @istest
    public static void datetests()
    Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
    dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now()));
    dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(1)));
    dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(2)));
    system.debug(dts);

    system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



    You would expect it to pass. Well, I did. But in fact, it fails.



    14:57:10:001 FATAL_ERROR System.AssertException: Assertion Failed: Expected: 1, Actual: 3


    Displaying something like:



    14:57:10:001 USER_DEBUG [10]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 09:00:00, 2019-05-01 10:00:00, 2019-05-01 11:00:00


    Now, part of why this may be happening is clear - While logic suggests that Date.ValueOf returns a date, it actually seems to return a DateTime (which contradicts the docs, but whatever...)



    In anonymous Apex:



    system.debug(Date.ValueOf(DateTime.now()));


    Returns at the moment:



    15:00:24:002 USER_DEBUG [1]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 10:00:00


    which is a datetime



    But you'd really expect Set to enforce uniqueness across dates regardless, right?



    I've searched online, known issues, etc. and didn't find anything obvious. I confess this completely caught me by surprise.



    So my question are:



    1. Can you reproduce this?

    2. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?

    3. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?

    4. Any other thoughts or ideas?

    Note - this testing is on a fresh SFDX scratch org running Spring 19 API 45. I did run the unit tests at API 40 just to make sure it wasn't a version artifact.










    share|improve this question


























      5












      5








      5








      Consider the following unit test:



      @istest
      public static void datetests2()
      Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
      dts.add(DateTime.now().Date());
      dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(1).Date());
      dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(2).Date());
      system.debug(dts);

      system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



      The result, as I'm sure you'd expect would be that the test would pass. The debug statement showing something like:



      14:49:36:002 USER_DEBUG [22]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 00:00:00


      Now consider this very similar unit test:



      @istest
      public static void datetests()
      Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now()));
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(1)));
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(2)));
      system.debug(dts);

      system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



      You would expect it to pass. Well, I did. But in fact, it fails.



      14:57:10:001 FATAL_ERROR System.AssertException: Assertion Failed: Expected: 1, Actual: 3


      Displaying something like:



      14:57:10:001 USER_DEBUG [10]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 09:00:00, 2019-05-01 10:00:00, 2019-05-01 11:00:00


      Now, part of why this may be happening is clear - While logic suggests that Date.ValueOf returns a date, it actually seems to return a DateTime (which contradicts the docs, but whatever...)



      In anonymous Apex:



      system.debug(Date.ValueOf(DateTime.now()));


      Returns at the moment:



      15:00:24:002 USER_DEBUG [1]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 10:00:00


      which is a datetime



      But you'd really expect Set to enforce uniqueness across dates regardless, right?



      I've searched online, known issues, etc. and didn't find anything obvious. I confess this completely caught me by surprise.



      So my question are:



      1. Can you reproduce this?

      2. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?

      3. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?

      4. Any other thoughts or ideas?

      Note - this testing is on a fresh SFDX scratch org running Spring 19 API 45. I did run the unit tests at API 40 just to make sure it wasn't a version artifact.










      share|improve this question
















      Consider the following unit test:



      @istest
      public static void datetests2()
      Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
      dts.add(DateTime.now().Date());
      dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(1).Date());
      dts.add(DateTime.now().addHours(2).Date());
      system.debug(dts);

      system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



      The result, as I'm sure you'd expect would be that the test would pass. The debug statement showing something like:



      14:49:36:002 USER_DEBUG [22]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 00:00:00


      Now consider this very similar unit test:



      @istest
      public static void datetests()
      Set<Date> dts = new Set<Date>();
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now()));
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(1)));
      dts.add(Date.valueOf(DateTime.now().addHours(2)));
      system.debug(dts);

      system.assertEquals(1, dts.size());



      You would expect it to pass. Well, I did. But in fact, it fails.



      14:57:10:001 FATAL_ERROR System.AssertException: Assertion Failed: Expected: 1, Actual: 3


      Displaying something like:



      14:57:10:001 USER_DEBUG [10]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 09:00:00, 2019-05-01 10:00:00, 2019-05-01 11:00:00


      Now, part of why this may be happening is clear - While logic suggests that Date.ValueOf returns a date, it actually seems to return a DateTime (which contradicts the docs, but whatever...)



      In anonymous Apex:



      system.debug(Date.ValueOf(DateTime.now()));


      Returns at the moment:



      15:00:24:002 USER_DEBUG [1]|DEBUG|2019-05-01 10:00:00


      which is a datetime



      But you'd really expect Set to enforce uniqueness across dates regardless, right?



      I've searched online, known issues, etc. and didn't find anything obvious. I confess this completely caught me by surprise.



      So my question are:



      1. Can you reproduce this?

      2. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?

      3. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?

      4. Any other thoughts or ideas?

      Note - this testing is on a fresh SFDX scratch org running Spring 19 API 45. I did run the unit tests at API 40 just to make sure it wasn't a version artifact.







      apex datetime date set






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      David Reed

      41k82463




      41k82463










      asked 4 hours ago









      kibitzerkibitzer

      2,4341324




      2,4341324




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          UPDATE



          It seems to have been reported as a known issue here. Though the title says String.valueOf but the code sample in the details reflects what is being observed here.




          This overall behavior is impacted because of Date.valueOf and not Set, as Set is behaving as expected. I think you will need to reach out to Salesforce Support (I will try to reach out as well) to report this behavior as the Date.valueOf should not return the timestamp values at the first place at least based on the documentation.



          Details and explanation below as response to your questions.





          1. Can you reproduce this?



          Yes. I was able to reproduce the behavior you have mentioned here.





          1. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?



          You may have (re)discovered a behavior (bug) here in the Date.valueOf method itself. There's a mention about the timestamp being returned in the docs (emphasis mine):




          In API version 33.0 or earlier, if you call Date.valueOf with an object that represents a Datetime, the method returns a Date value that contains the hours, minutes, and seconds.




          It just seems with the latest API version, it is behaving just like versions prior to 33.0 (as far as I can confirm)





          1. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?



          Based on the docs and the behavior, it seems this is a change in the expected behavior.





          1. Any other thoughts or ideas?



          The behavior for Set is as expected. In your second test, you are able to add the values in the Set as they are still distinct because of the timestamp that is returned along with. And if there are distinct values, your Set contains 3 different values in that case. This definitely needs to be reported.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

            – kibitzer
            1 hour ago











          • Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

            – Jayant Das
            1 hour ago











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "459"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f260789%2fset-collection-doesnt-always-enforce-uniqueness-with-the-date-datatype-does-th%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          3














          UPDATE



          It seems to have been reported as a known issue here. Though the title says String.valueOf but the code sample in the details reflects what is being observed here.




          This overall behavior is impacted because of Date.valueOf and not Set, as Set is behaving as expected. I think you will need to reach out to Salesforce Support (I will try to reach out as well) to report this behavior as the Date.valueOf should not return the timestamp values at the first place at least based on the documentation.



          Details and explanation below as response to your questions.





          1. Can you reproduce this?



          Yes. I was able to reproduce the behavior you have mentioned here.





          1. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?



          You may have (re)discovered a behavior (bug) here in the Date.valueOf method itself. There's a mention about the timestamp being returned in the docs (emphasis mine):




          In API version 33.0 or earlier, if you call Date.valueOf with an object that represents a Datetime, the method returns a Date value that contains the hours, minutes, and seconds.




          It just seems with the latest API version, it is behaving just like versions prior to 33.0 (as far as I can confirm)





          1. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?



          Based on the docs and the behavior, it seems this is a change in the expected behavior.





          1. Any other thoughts or ideas?



          The behavior for Set is as expected. In your second test, you are able to add the values in the Set as they are still distinct because of the timestamp that is returned along with. And if there are distinct values, your Set contains 3 different values in that case. This definitely needs to be reported.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

            – kibitzer
            1 hour ago











          • Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

            – Jayant Das
            1 hour ago















          3














          UPDATE



          It seems to have been reported as a known issue here. Though the title says String.valueOf but the code sample in the details reflects what is being observed here.




          This overall behavior is impacted because of Date.valueOf and not Set, as Set is behaving as expected. I think you will need to reach out to Salesforce Support (I will try to reach out as well) to report this behavior as the Date.valueOf should not return the timestamp values at the first place at least based on the documentation.



          Details and explanation below as response to your questions.





          1. Can you reproduce this?



          Yes. I was able to reproduce the behavior you have mentioned here.





          1. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?



          You may have (re)discovered a behavior (bug) here in the Date.valueOf method itself. There's a mention about the timestamp being returned in the docs (emphasis mine):




          In API version 33.0 or earlier, if you call Date.valueOf with an object that represents a Datetime, the method returns a Date value that contains the hours, minutes, and seconds.




          It just seems with the latest API version, it is behaving just like versions prior to 33.0 (as far as I can confirm)





          1. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?



          Based on the docs and the behavior, it seems this is a change in the expected behavior.





          1. Any other thoughts or ideas?



          The behavior for Set is as expected. In your second test, you are able to add the values in the Set as they are still distinct because of the timestamp that is returned along with. And if there are distinct values, your Set contains 3 different values in that case. This definitely needs to be reported.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

            – kibitzer
            1 hour ago











          • Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

            – Jayant Das
            1 hour ago













          3












          3








          3







          UPDATE



          It seems to have been reported as a known issue here. Though the title says String.valueOf but the code sample in the details reflects what is being observed here.




          This overall behavior is impacted because of Date.valueOf and not Set, as Set is behaving as expected. I think you will need to reach out to Salesforce Support (I will try to reach out as well) to report this behavior as the Date.valueOf should not return the timestamp values at the first place at least based on the documentation.



          Details and explanation below as response to your questions.





          1. Can you reproduce this?



          Yes. I was able to reproduce the behavior you have mentioned here.





          1. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?



          You may have (re)discovered a behavior (bug) here in the Date.valueOf method itself. There's a mention about the timestamp being returned in the docs (emphasis mine):




          In API version 33.0 or earlier, if you call Date.valueOf with an object that represents a Datetime, the method returns a Date value that contains the hours, minutes, and seconds.




          It just seems with the latest API version, it is behaving just like versions prior to 33.0 (as far as I can confirm)





          1. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?



          Based on the docs and the behavior, it seems this is a change in the expected behavior.





          1. Any other thoughts or ideas?



          The behavior for Set is as expected. In your second test, you are able to add the values in the Set as they are still distinct because of the timestamp that is returned along with. And if there are distinct values, your Set contains 3 different values in that case. This definitely needs to be reported.






          share|improve this answer















          UPDATE



          It seems to have been reported as a known issue here. Though the title says String.valueOf but the code sample in the details reflects what is being observed here.




          This overall behavior is impacted because of Date.valueOf and not Set, as Set is behaving as expected. I think you will need to reach out to Salesforce Support (I will try to reach out as well) to report this behavior as the Date.valueOf should not return the timestamp values at the first place at least based on the documentation.



          Details and explanation below as response to your questions.





          1. Can you reproduce this?



          Yes. I was able to reproduce the behavior you have mentioned here.





          1. Can anyone find/show documentation that addresses this?



          You may have (re)discovered a behavior (bug) here in the Date.valueOf method itself. There's a mention about the timestamp being returned in the docs (emphasis mine):




          In API version 33.0 or earlier, if you call Date.valueOf with an object that represents a Datetime, the method returns a Date value that contains the hours, minutes, and seconds.




          It just seems with the latest API version, it is behaving just like versions prior to 33.0 (as far as I can confirm)





          1. Does anyone know if this has always been like this, or are we seeing a change in behavior?



          Based on the docs and the behavior, it seems this is a change in the expected behavior.





          1. Any other thoughts or ideas?



          The behavior for Set is as expected. In your second test, you are able to add the values in the Set as they are still distinct because of the timestamp that is returned along with. And if there are distinct values, your Set contains 3 different values in that case. This definitely needs to be reported.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 1 hour ago









          Jayant DasJayant Das

          19.7k21331




          19.7k21331












          • Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

            – kibitzer
            1 hour ago











          • Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

            – Jayant Das
            1 hour ago

















          • Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

            – kibitzer
            1 hour ago











          • Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

            – Jayant Das
            1 hour ago
















          Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

          – kibitzer
          1 hour ago





          Regarding the behavior of set being as expected - shouldn't the fact that the Set is declared as type Date (Set<Date>) enforce uniqueness based on the Date part of the value? Intuitively, that is what I would expect...

          – kibitzer
          1 hour ago













          Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

          – Jayant Das
          1 hour ago





          Ideally yes but I think because the data in the set is still unique, it works on the data itself. And that based on the docs prior to v34.0 and the known issue, because a Date could still contain the timestamp values, the Set itself seems to be acting upon the data it contains.

          – Jayant Das
          1 hour ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Salesforce Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f260789%2fset-collection-doesnt-always-enforce-uniqueness-with-the-date-datatype-does-th%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

          Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

          Smell Mother Skizze Discussion Tachometer Jar Alligator Star 끌다 자세 의문 과학적t Barbaric The round system critiques the connection. Definition: A wind instrument of music in use among the Spaniards Nasty Level 이상 분노 금년 월급 근교 Cloth Owner Permissible Shock Purring Parched Raise 오전 장면 햄 서투르다 The smash instructs the squeamish instrument. Large Nosy Nalpure Chalk Travel Crayon Bite your tongue The Hulk 신호 대사 사과하다 The work boosts the knowledgeable size. Steeplump Level Wooden Shake Teaching Jump 이제 복도 접다 공중전화 부지런하다 Rub Average Ruthless Busyglide Glost oven Didelphia Control A fly on the wall Jaws 지하철 거