Paul G <p.gans...@gmail.com> added the comment: This seems very useful to me. I very frequently advise people *against* using dateutil.parser (despite my conflict of interest as maintainer of dateutil) for well-known formats, but the problem frequently comes up of, "what should I do when I have date created by isoformat()?", to which there's no clean satisfying answer other than, "use dateutil.parser even though you know the format."
I think the strptime page that Mario linked to is evidence that the %z directive is *intended* to match against -HH:MM, and so that might be the most "standard" solution. That said, I somewhat prefer the granularity of the GNU date extensions %z, %:z and %::z, since this allows downstream users to be stricter about what they are willing to accept. I think either approach is defensible, but that *something* should be done soon, preferably for the 3.7 release. ---------- nosy: +p-ganssle _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31800> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
