On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Tim Peters <[email protected]> wrote:
> +0 on the original proposal (doesn't really matter to me
> either way, but I have a mild preference for allowing a simplification
> ("require less") in the `timezone` subclass).
>
What would you say for the following proposal: leave tzinfo.tzname()
signature as is, but add
def name(self, dt=None):
return self.tzname(dt)
to the base tzinfo class. Now `tzname()` is a hook for tzinfo
implementers, but name() is the higher level function for the users. (Note
that I never liked that datetime.tzname() and tzinfo.tzname() had the same
method name, so my proposal may reflect a personal bias.)
_______________________________________________
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/
