internal date conversion slackness?

[Nicklas Karlsson <ni...@gmail.com>]

Hello,

 Is the internal String -> Date convertor supposed to be so forgiving that
it wraps 66.01.2006 (dd.MM.yyyy) into 07.03.2006 without
as much as a complaint? I have a custom validator but it only kicks in after
an "OK" date has been generated.

-Nik

Re: internal date conversion slackness?

[Nicklas Karlsson <ni...@gmail.com>]

Any takers on this?

On 1/25/06, Nicklas Karlsson <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>  Is the internal String -> Date convertor supposed to be so forgiving that
> it wraps 66.01.2006 (dd.MM.yyyy) into 07.03.2006 without
> as much as a complaint? I have a custom validator but it only kicks in
> after an "OK" date has been generated.
>
> -Nik
>

Re: internal date conversion slackness?

[Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>]

On 1/25/06, Nicklas Karlsson <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Is the internal String -> Date convertor supposed to be so forgiving that
> it wraps 66.01.2006 (dd.MM.yyyy) into 07.03.2006 without
> as much as a complaint? I have a custom validator but it only kicks in after
> an "OK" date has been generated.

I don't know the answer as to how lenient it is supposed to be, but
you can use a custom converter to make it less lenient.  You can
probably make your custom converter a subclass of the original
converter, maybe with a setLenient(false) call on the date formatter. 
I haven't looked at the source to see how hard that'd be.