Walter Dörwald wrote:
We should have one uniform way of representing time in Python. IMHO
datetime objects are the natural choice.
Alas datetime objects do not unambiguously identify a point in time.
datetime objects are not timestamps: They represent the related but
different concept of
On 6/28/05, Anders J. Munch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alas datetime objects do not unambiguously identify a point in time.
datetime objects are not timestamps: They represent the related but
different concept of _local time_, which can be good for presentation,
but shouldn't be allowed
I wrote:
Alas datetime objects do not unambiguously identify a point in time.
datetime objects are not timestamps: They represent the related but
different concept of _local time_, which can be good for
presentation,
but shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a persistent store.
GvR
[Anders J. Munch]
Alas datetime objects do not unambiguously identify a point in time.
datetime objects are not timestamps: They represent the related but
different concept of _local time_, which can be good for
presentation,
but shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a persistent store.
From: Guido van Rossum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
datetime.datetime.utcfromtimestamp(time.time()) -
datetime.datetime.utcnow()
datetime.timedelta(0)
I overlooked the utcfromtimestamp method, sorry.
Your bug is similar to comparing centimeters to inches, or speed to
acceleration, or any
[Anders J. Munch]
If ctime/mtime/atime were to return datetime objects, that would
pretty much have to be UTC to not lose information in the DST
transition. I doubt that's what Walter wanted though, as that would
leave users with the job of converting from UTC datetime to local
datetime; -
[Reinhold Birkenfeld]
One more issue is open: the one of naming. As path is already the
name of a module, what would the new object be called to avoid
confusion? pathobj? objpath? Path?
[Michael Hoffman]
I would argue for Path.
Granted path is actually os.path, but I don't think it's wise
At 12:08 PM 6/27/2005 +1200, Tony Meyer wrote:
[Reinhold Birkenfeld]
One more issue is open: the one of naming. As path is already the
name of a module, what would the new object be called to avoid
confusion? pathobj? objpath? Path?
[Michael Hoffman]
I would argue for Path.
Granted path
[Reinhold Birkenfeld]
One more issue is open: the one of naming. As path is already
the name of a module, what would the new object be called to
avoid confusion? pathobj? objpath? Path?
[Michael Hoffman]
I would argue for Path.
[Tony Meyer
Granted path is actually os.path, but I don't
