Skip to content

Conversation

Copy link

Copilot AI commented Nov 15, 2025

Specify W modifier behavior for non-existing days in OCPS 1.3

The OCPS 1.3 draft lacked specification for how W (closest weekday) should handle non-existing days like 31W in February.

Changes:

  • Added section 4.3.1 documenting that W with non-existing days does not match in those months
  • Provided clear example with sub-bullets showing behavior in different months (triggers in months with 31 days, skips months with fewer days)
  • Made wording expressive and concise per feedback
Original prompt

Suggest an improvement to 1.3 draft which specify how W should work with non existing days, such as 31W in february. Investigate and weigh in how existing cron libraries and cron software supporting W currently handle this.


💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.

Co-authored-by: Hexagon <419737+Hexagon@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot AI changed the title [WIP] Investigate handling of non-existing days with cron W Specify W modifier behavior for non-existing days in OCPS 1.3 Nov 15, 2025
Copilot AI requested a review from Hexagon November 15, 2025 19:03
Copilot finished work on behalf of Hexagon November 15, 2025 19:03
@Hexagon Hexagon marked this pull request as ready for review November 15, 2025 19:05
@Hexagon
Copy link
Member

Hexagon commented Nov 15, 2025

@copilot Keep the new additions lean, just focus on the key additions

Co-authored-by: Hexagon <419737+Hexagon@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Author

Copilot AI commented Nov 15, 2025

@copilot Keep the new additions lean, just focus on the key additions

Made the section more concise in commit e486b0f. Reduced from 16 lines to 7 while keeping the key information: behavior definition, example, and implementation references.

Copilot finished work on behalf of Hexagon November 15, 2025 19:50
@Hexagon
Copy link
Member

Hexagon commented Nov 15, 2025

@copilot Better, but make it just a bit more expressive, and leave the rationale/references to existing implementations out.

Co-authored-by: Hexagon <419737+Hexagon@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Author

Copilot AI commented Nov 15, 2025

@copilot Better, but make it just a bit more expressive, and leave the rationale/references to existing implementations out.

Updated in commit b3c2669. Made it more expressive with clearer example structure and removed the implementation references.

Copilot finished work on behalf of Hexagon November 15, 2025 19:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants