RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jul 25 13:48:53 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-July/121130.html

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:24:14 +0200
Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote:
> Am 25.07.2012 03:46, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
> > First you will have to show how you'd have to code this *without*
> > nanosecond precision in datetime and how tedious that is. (I expect
> > that representing the timestamp as a long integer expressing a posix
> > timestamp times a billion would be very reasonable.)
> 
> I'd vote for two separate numbers, the first similar to JDN (Julian Day
> Number [1]), the second for nanoseconds per day. 3600 * 1000000 fit
> nicely into an unsigned 32bit int.

But 24 * 3600 * 1e9 doesn't. Perhaps I didn't understand your proposal.

Regards

Antoine.

-- 
Software development and contracting: http://pro.pitrou.net

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-July/121130.html below:

[Python-Dev] datetime nanosecond support