[UnigramDev/Unigram/formatted-text-block-dates](https://github.com/UnigramDev/Unigram/tree/formatted-text-block-dates) • [ec95648](https://github.com/UnigramDev/Unigram/commit/ec95648fa35c5973faa4d7ae1f47b399be416d48) • _2 files, +247/-30_ Send the test messages from a script, and correct two cases The Bot API does carry the date entity, as date_time with unix_time and date_time_format. Worth knowing that unknown extra fields are accepted and ignored, so a wrong field name leaves the format empty and the date renders as plain text - it looks like the feature is broken rather than the request. Two cases in the plan could not exist. A spoiler may not overlap a date: the server splits the spoiler around it rather than rejecting the message. So a date inside a spoiler is not a state the app can be given, and the stretch branch of ShiftRanges is unreachable for dates - it stays live only for the marked and cached highlighters, which the app builds itself. The split is the better test anyway. T10 now sends a spoiler spanning a date and gets two covers back, one either side, which have to do different things across the same tick: the one in front stays, the one behind moves. The script takes the token and chat as arguments and carries neither. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) [UnigramDev/Unigram/formatted-text-block-dates](https://github.com/UnigramDev/Unigram/tree/formatted-text-block-dates) • [62519ad](https://github.com/UnigramDev/Unigram/commit/62519adb6c187f83c45780a30535dac2ec7625c5) • _1 files, +9/-0_ Note that a spoiler cannot contain a date Found while building the test set: the server splits a spoiler around a date rather than letting them overlap. So the branch that stretches a spoiler around a growing date is unreachable for dates, and stays live only for the marked and cached highlighters, which the app builds itself. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) [#unigram](?q=%23unigram)