Open rdiez opened 3 weeks ago
It is difficult to use datediff in a robust manner. For example, dates that are obviously invalid are still accepted:
$ dateutils.ddiff 2024-1x-k3 2024-01-02 2
That happens even if a particular input format is specified:
$ dateutils.ddiff --input-format="%d/%m/%Y" 2024-1x-k3 31/12/2024 366
It looks like datediff is applying the input formats only to the 2nd date specified, because this fails properly:
$ dateutils.ddiff --input-format="%d/%m/%Y" 2024-1x-k2 2024-3x-k4 ddiff: cannot make sense of `2024-3x-k4' using the given input formats
I am using the datediff 0.4.5 which comes with Ubuntu 22.04.
Hi, thanks for the report. A fix is in 9c592942f.
OK, thanks for the quick fix.
It is difficult to use datediff in a robust manner. For example, dates that are obviously invalid are still accepted:
That happens even if a particular input format is specified:
It looks like datediff is applying the input formats only to the 2nd date specified, because this fails properly:
I am using the datediff 0.4.5 which comes with Ubuntu 22.04.