On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <ste...@sun.ac.za>wrote:
> > that the main thing missing at this point is fixing the datetime > problems. > > What needs to be done, and what is the plan forward? > I'm not sure that's quite been decided, but my take: 1) remove the existing time zone handling -- it simply isn't useful often, and does cause a pain in the &%^& often. - as far as I know, the only point of debate to the simple not-time-zone aware datetimes is whether that means "UTC" or "Local" or "Not Known" -- these are pretty subtle distinctions and I think really only have an impact when you try to parse an iso string with a timezone attached. 2) _maybe_ do something smarter -- though this takes a lot more work and discussion as to what that should be. I think they key points are captured here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/53805 There is an issue: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/3388, but there is no detail there. There are a number of other issues that come up in discussion: * More precision with lap-seconds, etc. * Allowing an epoch that can change -- this is really crucial if you want picoseconds and friends to be remotely useful. But these are orthogonal issues AFIIC, except that maybe one we open it up it makes sense to do it at once... -Chris > Is there perhaps an issue one can follow? > > Thanks > Stéfan > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
