Re: Is this really what we want?

Hi,

In message "Re: Is this really what we want?"
    on Wed, 8 Aug 2007 05:08:43 +0900, James Edward Gray II <[e-mail]> writes:

|I'm investigating some recent breakage in FasterCSV and have tracking  
|it down to a change in the Date standard library.  Is this really the  
|desired behavior now:
|
|   $ ruby -r date -e 'p Date.parse("junk")'
|   #<Date: 4908505/2,0,2299161>
|
|?

I asked the author, and he told us it's a side effect of parse
accepting month name only.  The parse methods (both Date.parse and
Time.parse) are not for validation.  Considering the complexity of
date representation they accept, validation is nearly impossible.  The
author does not think it is worth the cost of implementing more rigid
check.

							matz.