Alexander Belopolsky <alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> added the comment:
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:37 AM, Antoine Pitrou <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: .. > I agree with Victor that the APIs need improving, even if it involves > providing obvious replacements of obscure one-liners. While I agree that the datetime API can be improved, I don't think Victor's proposal does that. The advantage of an obscure one-liner is that it is obvious what it does, particularly for someone with a C/UNIX background. dt.totimestamp() may be easier to write, but it is entirely non-obvious what it will return. One would expect that dt.totimestamp() is the inverse of datetime.fromtimestamp(timestamp), but in timezones with daylight savings adjustments, but such inverse may not always exist. (01:59AM may be followed by 02:00 AM or by 01:00 AM. so on changeover days datetime(y, m, d, 1, 30).totimestamp() is either ambiguous or undefined.) As I suggested in my previous comment, this problem can be resolved, but we are not there yet. > As an occasional user of datetime and time modules, I have too often wanted > to curse those limited, awkwardly inconsistent APIs. Yes, it would be ideal if a user of datetime module would not need to reach to other modules for date/time calculations. See also <http://bugs.python.org/issue6280>. Do you have other examples of this sort? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue2736> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
