--- In [email protected], Stephen Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > parseDate.setMonth(++parseDate.month); > > > Then that statement above gives different results to: > ++parseDate.month > parseDate.setMonth(parseDate.month); > > which gives: > > Sat Nov 1 00:00:00 GMT+0000 2008 Sun Feb 1 00:00:00 GMT+0000 2009 > Mon Dec 1 00:00:00 GMT+0000 2008 Sun Feb 1 00:00:00 GMT+0000 2009 > Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 GMT+0000 2009 Sun > > (i.e. it behaves as you would expect) > > Shouldn't the two versions be executed the same way? - i.e. month is > incremented from 11 to 0 by the ++month (causing the year rollover) > and then this 0 is passed into setMonth which should just set it to 0 > again and cause no rollover. The call to setMonth is superfluous > (though personally I'd go with setDate(parseDate.month + 1)) but > shouldn't actually be doing anything as in both above cases it's just > being passed 0 and so should either cause a year rollover in both > cases (which would be buggy but consistent) or in neither case, that > it's different is a bit worrying.
See, I didn't realize you could just increment the month that way :- ). I thought that the setMonth() method was there in lieu of having a setter on month. -Amy
