On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Tim Peters <[email protected]> wrote: > Speaking of which, the current tzinfo API has no way to ask "is this > an ambiguous time?"
I was hoping that we would agree on the name of the flag before someone asks this question. :-) With my proposal, a naive datetime t is ambiguous in timezone tz if tz.utcoffset(t) < tz.utcoffset(t.replace(first=False)) > or "is this an invalid (missing) time?" I was hoping to sneak in a rule that for an invalid time t tz.utcoffset(t) > tz.utcoffset(t.replace(first=False)) (I really don't want tz.utcoffset(t) to ever raise an exception) and of course, for most of the times tz.utcoffset(t) == tz.utcoffset(t.replace(first=False)) > The most > important new question callers will want to resolve is "what should > `first` (aka is_dst) be now?". I want most callers to be able to get away with not knowing that `first` exists and consistently get the earlier time from an ambiguous input and some "nearby" time from an invalid input. A careful application will have to call tz.utcoffset() with both values of the flag and either warn about the default choice or ask the user for an additional input. _______________________________________________ Datetime-SIG mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/datetime-sig The PSF Code of Conduct applies to this mailing list: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
