I made it up, in analogy to "classic classes" in Python 2. I did this not as a euphemism, but to avoid confusion, since in the existing docs "naive" is only ever applied to objects (meaning tzinfo-less) and I wanted to have a term that couldn't confuse anyone into thinking we were only talking about arithmetic of naive objects.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Carl Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/04/2015 12:11 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > Keep in mind that the standard library should not only support "casual > > users", but also those who will write a "period > > recurrence library" for those "casual users." This is where classic > > arithmetic is indispensable. > > Oh, I'm well aware. But naive arithmetic is always available - on naive > datetimes. > > Btw, I have a minor objection to the term "classic arithmetic." It's a > made-up term from this mailing list, and I don't think it describes a > real distinct thing, it's just a euphemism for "naive arithmetic." > > I'm not sure why the euphemism arose; I _think_ it arose because it > sounds wrong to say that aware datetimes perform naive arithmetic. I > think that sounds wrong to roughly the same extent that it is wrong, so > I don't see any point in using a made-up euphemism to hide it :-) > > Carl > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ 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/
