[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset ee64faffd46a by Berker Peksag in branch 'default': Issue #747320: Use email.utils.formatdate() to avoid code duplication https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/ee64faffd46a -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Python

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Berker Peksag added the comment: -now = time.time() -year, month, day, hh, mm, ss, x, y, z = time.localtime(now) -s = "%02d/%3s/%04d %02d:%02d:%02d" % ( -day, self.monthname[month], year, hh, mm, ss) +s = time.strftime("%d/%b/%Y %H:%M:%S",

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Berker Peksag added the comment: Here is an updated patch (including tests and documentation updates). -- components: -email nosy: +berker.peksag stage: needs patch -> patch review type: performance -> enhancement versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.5 Added file:

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Éric Araujo added the comment: what do you recommend to move forward with this bug and patches? I would add tests to 3.4, to be sure that changing the code in 3.5 does not break compatibility. Do you have an example for (A minor thing: I would use “attribute” instead of “variable” in the

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Changes by Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk: -- nosy: -BreamoreBoy ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320 ___ ___

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

karl added the comment: Eric, what do you recommend to move forward with this bug and patches? Need guidance. Do you have an example for (A minor thing: I would use “attribute” instead of “variable” in the docstrings.) Also which code base I should use? A lot of water has gone under the

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

karl added the comment: Ok after comments and review by Eric Araujo on the previous patch. See issue-747320-3.patch I have ran → ./python.exe Lib/test/test_httpservers.py […] -- Ran 39 tests in 3.734s OK [137158 refs] That

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Éric Araujo added the comment: Tests would be great, especially given that we can add them in 3.2 and when merging 3.2 into 3.3 and then default, it ensures that the new code has no regression. (A minor thing: I would use “attribute” instead of “variable” in the docstrings.) There are also

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

R. David Murray added the comment: Could you regenerate your patch using hg diff? (or at least diff -u)? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320 ___

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

karl added the comment: R. David Murray: Sure. Is it better? issue-747320-1.patch It seems there are already tests for gmt date format in Lib/test/test_email/test_utils.py -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file29279/issue-747320-1.patch ___

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

karl added the comment: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-22#section-7.1.1 quoting from HTTP 1.1 bis Prior to 1995, there were three different formats commonly used by servers to communicate timestamps. For compatibility with old implementations, all three

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

karl added the comment: Made a mistake in the previous server.patch, use server.2.patch -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file29241/server2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Changes by karl karl+pythonb...@la-grange.net: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file29240/server.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320 ___

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

R. David Murray added the comment: I notice that logging has been updated. Only http.server's date_time_string remains (email.utils.formatdate does support the GMT form). -- components: +email versions: +Python 3.4 -Python 3.2 ___ Python tracker

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk added the comment: Does this need to be addressed or can it be closed as out of date or what? -- nosy: +BreamoreBoy ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment: It still needs to be addressed. I'm marking it for 3.2 but I doubt it will get addressed before 3.3 in reality. I also made the type 'performance' since we have no 'refactoring' type. -- nosy: +r.david.murray stage: - needs

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Changes by Shashwat Anand anand.shash...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +l0nwlf ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue747320] rfc2822 formatdate functionality duplication

Daniel Diniz aja...@gmail.com added the comment: Still present in source, but doesn't seem too bad. -- nosy: +ajaksu2 versions: +Python 2.6 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue747320