> The discussion is going astray again: Fredrik proposed an abstract > base type, i.e. a type providing only the name and an interface > which is defined as convention. > > I am all for adding such an abstract base type (and others > as well, e.g. for numbers, sequences, money, decimal, etc.) > with minimal interfaces, but not for fixing a complex interface > on top of these. > > What you are currently discussing is heading in the direction > of imlementing one or more time subclasses. That's two steps > ahead of what Fredrik was proposing. Good point. The two discussions are both useful, but should be separated. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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