GNU bug report logs - #14613
Date -- incorrect invalid date

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 14613 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Chris F.A. Johnson" <chris <at> cfajohnson.com>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: Date  -- incorrect invalid date
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:15:26 -0400 (EDT)

$ date -d '2 June, 2013'
date: invalid date `2 June, 2013'

  This should be accepted, just as 'June 2, 2013' is.

-- 
   Chris F.A. Johnson, <http://cfajohnson.com/>
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

Message #8 received at 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bob Proulx <bob <at> proulx.com>
To: "Chris F.A. Johnson" <chris <at> cfajohnson.com>
Cc: 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14613: Date  -- incorrect invalid date
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:28:56 -0600

severity 14613 wishlist
thanks

Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> $ date -d '2 June, 2013'
> date: invalid date `2 June, 2013'
> 
>   This should be accepted, just as 'June 2, 2013' is.

Patches to improve the old date parser would always be considered and
appreciated.  The date parser is an old legacy piece of code and has
many known limitations.

Bob

Message #13 received at 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj <at> riseup.net>
To: 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Make parse_datetime (and therefore `date') handle 'DAY MONTH,
 YEAR'
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:01:28 -0300

Hi there,

I have a fix for this issue.  This fix touches Gnulib, but I am sending
it here anyway so you guys can test and make sure it works.

It basically adds a simple production on lib/parse-datetime.y to extend
it in order to correctly handle the proposed date format, i.e., '2 June,
2013'.  It works OK here, but I'd be glad if you could give it a test.
Comments are also obviously welcome.

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio

diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index 4d73a26..d9d89ad 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2013-07-27  Sergio Durigan Junior  <sergiodj <at> riseup.net>
+
+	* lib/parse-datetime.y (date): Add production to handle dates like
+	'27 July, 2013'.  Problem reported for coreutils by Chris F.A.
+	Johnson in <http://bugs.gnu.org/14613>.
+
 2013-07-09  Paul Eggert  <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
 
 	regex: port to --with-included-regex --enable-gcc-warnings non-threaded
diff --git a/lib/parse-datetime.y b/lib/parse-datetime.y
index 4dce7fa..675ba5c 100644
--- a/lib/parse-datetime.y
+++ b/lib/parse-datetime.y
@@ -535,6 +535,13 @@ date:
         pc->month = $2;
         pc->year = $3;
       }
+  | tUNUMBER tMONTH ',' tUNUMBER
+      {
+        /* e.g. 2 June, 2013.  */
+        pc->day = $1.value;
+	pc->month = $2;
+	pc->year = $4;
+      }
   | iso_8601_date
   ;
 

Message #16 received at 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj <at> riseup.net>
Cc: 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14613: [PATCH] Make parse_datetime (and therefore `date')
 handle 'DAY MONTH, YEAR'
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 23:45:17 +0200

That format is typically considered to be erroneous, e.g.,
<http://www.grammar.com/dates-day-month-year/>, so I'm
not sure parse_datetime should be supporting it.

Message #19 received at 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj <at> riseup.net>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 14613 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14613: [PATCH] Make parse_datetime (and therefore `date')
 handle 'DAY MONTH, YEAR'
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 20:13:34 -0300

On Saturday, July 27 2013, Paul Eggert wrote:

> That format is typically considered to be erroneous, e.g.,
> <http://www.grammar.com/dates-day-month-year/>, so I'm
> not sure parse_datetime should be supporting it.

I wasn't aware parse_datetime followed a defined grammar.  And this
seems to be an English grammar idiosyncrasy, which is definitely not
familiar to me (not a native english speaker).

IMO, I don't really see a problem supporting an "erroneous English
grammar", since parse_datetime should probably not be so strict about it
and adapt to such small cases.

Anyway, just my opinion.

-- 
Sergio

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.