I'm sorry that you don't appear to have understood that paragraph. I'm sorry that you took it as hostile. It wasn't meant as hostile. If you had managed to avoid interpreting it as hostile, then I believe you would have had more luck in understanding it.
It didn't help that it felt like you glossed over my post -- i.e. that the query works in SQL Developer.
Based on your responses, you appear to have only been glossing over my replies. But that is to be expected when one applies stark emotions to one's interpretation.
I didn't respond to the post you mention above. I responded to a different post of yours. I responded mostly to just the following:
Why isn't "like" appropriate? I'm only specif[ying] e.g. a date and leaving the time out, so it's not an exact match.
That, in itself, demonstrates that you just "made up" something. The fact that you found a case where your made-up semantics appear to match observed behavior doesn't actually disprove that the semantics you posit are just made-up.
Did you read a manual entry about "LIKE" that noted that it can be used to do "an [in]exact match" between date and/or datetime values (and without using '%')? If not, where did you get this feature idea? It is my assessment that you just made up those semantics. I stand by that assessment.
I mean, it worked, so I wasn't just "making stuff up".
"It appears to work" or "it works in the cases that I've tried" doesn't actually mean that it is doing what you think or what you meant it to do.
Since the values that you were dealing with almost surely contained no '%' characters, then LIKE "working" likely just means that you ended up with two identical strings ('foo' LIKE 'foo' is true in SQL). Your assumption that "so it's not an exact match" was likely incorrect. My guess is that your datetime got converted to a date before the comparison was done. There was likely an exact match after type conversion took place. I say "likely" all over the place because I'm making educated guesses rather from afar.
Had you researched what LIKE actually does for your particular database, you probably wouldn't have stuck with your made-up behavior idea.
The reasons I said "made up" rather than something more mundane like noting that you appear to be or are likely mistaken are at least 1) Somebody had already taken the latter option (which still didn't appear to prompt you to examine or research your imagined behavior), 2) Your imagined behavior was quite at odds with the quite specific and simple behavior of LIKE (at least in the databases I am familiar with) and appears to have been prompted by little more than the English meaning of the word "like", 3) I found it mildly amusing.
The reasons didn't include "I was trying to be hostile" nor even that I was feeling hostile.