What will you do when you find this on someones code ?

Kill the motherfucker.

What kind of tobacco were they smoking? Eugh

it's at least descriptive, could be worse

@JoshBent exactly my thoughts. You know what the method does, you know what the vars are, it could be a lot worse.

so... this dude just wants the date format from YYYYMMMDD to DDMMYYYY? What seems to be the issue here?

I'm not a huge fan of the function name/signature but if this person just wrote the code using the existing functions, what's the problem? It's not their fault the existing date conversion functions suck, and depending on what they're doing with that date it's quite likely to be required in that format. There are common third-party APIs that require the dates in DDMMYYY format (pity me), and this date might have been formatted for user display.

@monzrmango imho issue is adding over descriptiveness to a highly descriptive language !