Issue #13193 has been updated by Marcus Stollsteimer. Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote: > To "demonstrate that different dates can result in the same return value", isn't `Date.new(2001,1,28)` better? Agreed. Maybe there even should be an extra paragraph that explicitly points this out. And maybe also the following, possibly surprising sort of behavior should be mentioned: ``` require "date" date = Date.new(2001,1,31) 12.times { date >>= 1 } date.to_s # => "2002-01-28" date = Date.new(2001,1,31) date >>= 12 date.to_s # => "2002-01-31" ``` Should I prepare a patch? ---------------------------------------- Bug #13193: [DOC] Revise docs for Date and DateTime https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13193#change-62891 * Author: Marcus Stollsteimer * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: * ruby -v: ruby 2.4.0p0 (2016-12-24 revision 57164) [i686-linux] * Backport: 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ``` ext/date/date_core.c: [DOC] revise docs for Date and DateTime * fix malformed rdoc for Date#today, Date._strptime, and DateTime._strptime * add code examples for Date#<< and Date#>> to demonstrate that different dates can result in the same return value * use Date::ITALY in call-seq instead of only ITALY * fix some copy/paste mistakes where Date should be DateTime * fix various errors and grammar * fix cross references and formatting ``` ---Files-------------------------------- doc_date_datetime.patch (34.1 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>