That makes sense indeed. Wouldn't it be an idea to test for the single allowed format before parsing it?
> : I see, is the leading - char just ignored then? > > i'd have to re-look at the tests/docs (i don't really want to repeat > that agonizing headache right now), but i believe what you are seeing is a > compound problem... > > * parsing sees the -0001 and recognizes that as a negative year. > * somewhere the negative year is dealt with in a way that assumes there is > (isn't?) a year 0, making "-1" => "Year 2 BC" > * formatting code doesn't include the era in the output and > doesn't zero pad propertly so you just get "2" in the response. > > > -Hoss
