No, BrowserUK is right; the first date is incorrect. If you notice, the second date contains the year 2005, which is how Time::Piece requires it. When I added another zero to the first date's year, I got the desired output.
In reply to Re^3: Time::Piece strangeness take two
by spiritway
in thread Time::Piece strangeness take two
by InfiniteLoop
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |