Re: BUG #16216: the result of to_date function with negative year number not same as BC year number

>> ISTM that the documentation does not say that -120 is supported as meaning
>> BC.
>
> Indeed it does not. The behavior is "correct" in terms of our internals,
> as you say, but I'm a bit distressed to find that we're exposing the
> internals this much.

I agree.

> If we do anything about this, my vote would be to throw an error for
> zero or negative year field.

Yep, being stricter.

> OTOH, the point of to_date is mostly not to throw an error, so maybe we
> should leave it be.

I'll think about it.

>> BTW I found another oddity while trying strange date patterns:
>> sql> SELECT DATE 'Jan 1, 0001 AD';
>> # 0001-01-01
>> But:
>> sql> SELECT DATE 'Jan 1, 1 AD';
>> # 2001-01-01 # WT*?
>
> I'm pretty sure that's intentional; if you specify two or fewer
> year digits, a year between 1970 and 2069 is presumed to be meant.

Hmmm. Ok, I see.

If I write a fuzzy "31/12/01", I'm pretty okay with 2001-12-31. but if I
write '1 AD', I would expect '1 AD'.

--
Fabien.