Tim Peters wrote: > I checked in changes so that datetime and date comparison return > NotImplemented (instead of raising TypeError) if "the other" argument has a > timetuple attribute. This gives other kinds of datetime objects a chance to > intercept the comparison and implement it themselves. Nice. > Note that this doesn't help for mixed-type time or timedelta comparison: > datetime's time and timedelta objects don't have timetuple methods > themselves, and their comparison implementations still raise TypeError > whenever they don't recognize the other comparand's type (this is needed to > prevent comparison against objects of arbitrary types from falling back to > the default comparison of object addresses). Why not add them (setting the date parts to None) ? -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH _______________________________________________________________________ eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,... Python Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/
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