There were discussions about having it a function, making the constructor of datetime accept a string(this was strongly rejected), having a static funcion in datetime, etc... and there was no real agreement.
If the agreement is that we want a funcion to be able to parse it I am sure Paul G will be kind to do it (he told me not long ago he was thinking on sending a PR for it). If he is busy I am happy to chip in time this weekend. All I wanted when I sent https://bugs.python.org/issue31800 was actually to be able to parse isoformat datetime ^^. Thu, 30 Nov 2017 at 00:09, Alexander Belopolsky < alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> > wrote: > >> >> indeed what is the holdup? I don't recall anyone saying it was a bad idea >> in the last discussion. >> >> Do we just need an implementation? >> >> Is the one in the Bug Report not up to snuff? If not, then what's wrong >> with it? This is just not that hard a problem to solve. >> > > > See my comment from over a year ago: < > https://bugs.python.org/issue15873#msg273609>. The proposed patch did > not have a C implementation, but we can use the same approach as with > strptime and call Python code from C. If users will start complaining > about performance, we can speed it up in later releases. Also the new > method needs to be documented. Overall, it does not seem to require more > than an hour of work from a motivated developer, but the people who > contributed to the issue in the past seem to have lost their interest. > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mariocj89%40gmail.com >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
