On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Alexander Belopolsky < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Alexander Belopolsky < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > PEP 495 [1] is a deliberately minimalistic proposal to remove an > > ambiguity in representing some local times as datetime.datetime > > objects. > > A major issue has come up since my announcement above. Tim Peters have > noticed that PEP 495 would violate the "hash invariant" unless the fold > attribute is accounted for in inter-zone comparisons. > See [2] for details. This issue has been resolved by modifying the > definition [3] of the "==" operator for aware datetimes with post-PEP > tzinfo. Note that no program will be affected by this change unless it > uses a post-PEP tzinfo implementation. > > I made some smaller changes [4] to the PEP as well and it should finally > be ready for pronouncement. > > [1]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0495 > [2]: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/datetime-sig/2015-September/000625.html > [3]: > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0495/#aware-datetime-equality-comparison > [4]: https://hg.python.org/peps/log/39b7c1da05a2/pep-0495.txt > I've reviewed this latest version and I am hereby accepting it. The topic is both controversial and yawn-inducing, so I think it's better not to give the usual one-day warning on python-dev -- I'll just post my decision there. Alexander and Tim, thank for all your work on this! It's been a wild, wild ride. (And no, I am not going to make a joke about leap seconds here. :-) -- --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/
