Paul Ganssle <p.gans...@gmail.com> added the comment:

With regards to automatically deducing column types, I am -1 on that. It has 
way too many dangerous edge cases, and I know of countless bugs in software 
that are the direct result of stringly-typed data being coerced into a specific 
data type based on its form. For example, if you have an excel column of 
alphanumeric strings and happen to get one that looks like "13943E1", that will 
be coerced (lossily) into the number 139430.0, because it happens to take the 
form of exponential notation.

> I contains a table `t` with a TEXT column `x` and a DATETIME (according to 
> SQLiteStudio) column `y`.

It sounds to me like SQLiteStudio is doing the same thing that Python is doing, 
by extending the "types" available to include a DATETIME. Presumably they do it 
the same way, with "datetime" in the column name. If that's the case then it's 
just a mismatch between what they call their datetime adapter and what python 
does, and you just need to rename the relevant columns to say "timestamp" 
instead of "datetime".

As an aside, this is what we get from people not offering real datetime types 
in their standards. JSON has the exact same problem - people need to transmit 
datetimes but there's no way to do it in the standard, so everyone extends the 
standard in a sightly different way and you end up with a bunch of incompatible 
ways of storing datetimes as strings. Bah humbug.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35145>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to