Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060712/afe7da0c/attachment.htm below:
On 7/12/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Guido van Rossum</b> <<a href="mailto:guido@python.org">guido@python.org</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <<a href="mailto:arigo@tunes.org">arigo@tunes.org</a>> wrote:<br>> I guess I'm going to side with Greg Black on his blog entry.<br><br>I seem to recall that that particular one wass *not* an accidental
<br>bug. I believe I fell over exactly the problem that Greg Black<br>complained about (or almost the same; maybe my problem was setting the<br>month and day to zero and formatting only the time :-) and tried to<br>convince the author to change it; but was told that the new behavior
<br>was never documented and that the new behavior was somehow better; and<br>I didn't fight it further then. Do I remember this correctly? Does<br>anybody else recall?</blockquote><div><br>My recollection is that we found a way to cause a crash if improper values were used. We never said 0s were allowed in the docs and that it could mask bugs if you did use them and we supported them (
e.g., setting 0 for January instead of 1 if you were thinking in terms of indexing at the time). So we said that values should be within the proper range and not above or below them.<br><br>The python-dev Summary coverage can be found at
<a href="http://www.python.org/dev/summary/2004-02-01_2004-02-29/#time-strftime-now-checks-its-argument-s-bounds">http://www.python.org/dev/summary/2004-02-01_2004-02-29/#time-strftime-now-checks-its-argument-s-bounds</a>
.<br><br>-Brett<br></div></div>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo
| Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4