RetroSearch Browse

Wed Oct 25 15:48:49 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-October/149957.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium-
> list=sdamon.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Elvis Pranskevichus
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:12 PM
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Cc: Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing
> 
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:53:58 PM EDT Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> > No, but the last time I suggested that that datetime types should
> > satisfy the same invariants as numbers, namely
> > T(repr(x)) == x, the idea was met will silence.  I, on the other hand,
> > am not very enthusiastic about named constructors such as
> > date.isoparse().  Compared with date(s:str), this is one more method
> > name to remember, plus the potential for abuse as an instance method.
> > What is d.isoparse('2017-11-24')?
> 
> Agreed.  datetime(s:str) seems like a far more natural and consistent
> choice.

It's inconsistent with the rest of the module.  All other constructions of
datetime objects are on classmethods.  Why make parsing ISO time special?

> 
>                                  Elvis
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium-
> list%40sdamon.com

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-October/149957.html below:

[Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing