Bug #12003: Unexpected behavior of === with Range of Date objects

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: -
• Target version: -
• Backport: 2.0.0: DONTNEED, 2.1: DONTNEED, 2.2: DONTNEED, 2.3: DONE

[rossta (Ross Kaffenberger)]

In Ruby 2.2, a Range of Date objects will return true when matched with === for a new Date that falls in the range:

puts ENV['RUBY_VERSION']
# => '2.2.3'
require 'date'
date_range = Date.new(1980, 1, 1)..Date.new(1990, 1, 10)
# => #<Date: 1980-01-01 ((2444240j,0s,0n),+0s,2299161j)>..#<Date: 1990-01-10 ((2447902j,0s,0n),+0s,2299161j)>
puts date_range.cover? Date.new(1989, 10, 13)
# => true
puts date_range === Date.new(1989, 10, 13)
# => true

In Ruby 2.3.0, === returns false for the same date and date range:

puts ENV['RUBY_VERSION']
# => '2.3.0'
require 'date'
date_range = Date.new(1980, 1, 1)..Date.new(1990, 1, 10)
# => #<Date: 1980-01-01 ((2444240j,0s,0n),+0s,2299161j)>..#<Date: 1990-01-10 ((2447902j,0s,0n),+0s,2299161j)>
puts date_range.cover? Date.new(1989, 10, 13)
# => true
puts date_range === Date.new(1989, 10, 13)
# => false

In both Ruby 2.2.3 and Ruby 2.3.0, date comparisons with === return true, i.e, Date.new(1980, 1, 1) === Date.new(1980, 1, 1) # => true.

I believe this may be a regression in the === implementation of Range.

[shugo (Shugo Maeda)]

• Status changed from Open to Closed

Applied in changeset r53635.

---

• range.c (range_eqq): revert r11113 because rb_call_super() is
  called in range_include() and thus r11113 doesn't work when the
  receiver Range object consists of non linear objects such as Date
  objects.
  [ruby-core:72908] [Bug #12003]

[shugo (Shugo Maeda)]

• Backport changed from 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN to 2.0.0: DONTNEED, 2.1: DONTNEED, 2.2: DONTNEED, 2.3: REQUIRED

Ross Kaffenberger wrote:

In Ruby 2.2, a Range of Date objects will return true when matched with === for a new Date that falls in the range:
(snip)
In Ruby 2.3.0, === returns false for the same date and date range:

Fixed in r53635, but Range#=== is slow when the receiver consists of Date objects, because it uses Enumerable#include? internally.
So I recommend Range#cover? instead.

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Backport changed from 2.0.0: DONTNEED, 2.1: DONTNEED, 2.2: DONTNEED, 2.3: REQUIRED to 2.0.0: DONTNEED, 2.1: DONTNEED, 2.2: DONTNEED, 2.3: DONE

ruby_2_3 r54403 merged revision(s) 53635.