Hi @KrohnusMelavea, thanks for the PR.

Would you mind adding a few unit tests please to show different date formats that now work that didn't before. Thanks!

Added positive and negative tests for my new branch implementing the fixed date parse. How would you like me to create the tests for the existing implementation on your repository? I could branch off main, add similar tests to the current implementation to demonstrate it failing, then create a pull request for that second branch?

Screenshot showing the new tests passing.

Added positive and negative tests for my new branch implementing the fixed date parse.

Looks great, thanks!

How would you like me to create the tests for the existing implementation on your repository?

Feel free to just add those tests to this branch, maybe in a seperate it() block, and I'll just double check that they were failing with the old logic locally 👍

I added those new tests and hope that they're to your satisfaction.

All tests pass.

Thanks for the tests @KrohnusMelavea! I cleaned the commits up a bit and will now merge and release.

🎉 This PR is included in version 19.0.1 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

I hope this doesn't have too much of a performance impact now that we're trying to instantiate a date rather than using regex.

If we get performance complaints then I think we might need to go back to a regex but perhaps a regex that supports more dates. There are some very thorough ones here https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15491894/regex-to-validate-date-formats-dd-mm-yyyy-dd-mm-yyyy-dd-mm-yyyy-dd-mmm-yyyy

Hmm, it didn't cause any problems in our codebase. Let me know if it ends up being an issue, and I'd be more than happy to amend my implementation.

OK sounds great 👌 Thanks again

There is a flaw in this logic where numbers are sometimes treated as dates. See #275

Decided to revert this change. See #285 for details.