Alexander Belopolsky <belopol...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Tim Peters <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: .. > I'm not going to argue about whether datetime "should have been" subclassed > from date - fact is that it was, and since it was > Guido's idea from the start, he wouldn't change it now even if his time > machine weren't out for repairs ;-) I know, he will probably accept the fact that 23:59:60 is valid time first. :-) I still very much appreciate your insights. I think I mentioned that in my other posts, but I find datetime design very elegant and when I find things that I would have done differently my first reaction is that I am probably missing something. datetime(date) inheritance is one of those things. Another is tzinfo attribute of time. With time t, t.utcoffset() is kid of useless given that you cannot subtract it from t and unless tzinfo is a fixed offset timezone, there is not enough information in t to compute the offset to begin with. Do you have any historical insight on this one? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7989> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
