Dieter Maurer wrote:
Laurence Rowe wrote at 2007-9-26 11:08 +0100:
...
To enable an evolutionary approach DateTime - datetime conversions
must be made round-tripable. This is currently difficult as DateTimes
have a resolution of milliseconds and datetimes a resolution of
microseconds. I
Andreas Jung wrote:
snip /
Just for the logs: I gave up my work on an inplace DateTime migration..
too compliated, too much cruft would have to remain for backward
compatibility. Let's see how we can address the issue in a reasonable
way :-)
To enable an evolutionary approach DateTime -
--On 26. September 2007 11:08:23 +0100 Laurence Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
snip /
Just for the logs: I gave up my work on an inplace DateTime migration..
too compliated, too much cruft would have to remain for backward
compatibility. Let's see how we can address the
Laurence Rowe wrote at 2007-9-26 11:08 +0100:
...
To enable an evolutionary approach DateTime - datetime conversions
must be made round-tripable. This is currently difficult as DateTimes
have a resolution of milliseconds and datetimes a resolution of
microseconds. I propose:
* Increase the
Previously Dieter Maurer wrote:
Laurence Rowe wrote at 2007-9-26 11:08 +0100:
...
To enable an evolutionary approach DateTime - datetime conversions
must be made round-tripable. This is currently difficult as DateTimes
have a resolution of milliseconds and datetimes a resolution of
--On 28. August 2007 12:04:35 +0100 Laurence Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
snip /
I believe that datetime is not even importable in TTW code
and datetime objects not accessible in TTW code -- at least,
they have not been until recently...
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-9-1 12:59 +0200:
...
I came across python-dateutil some days ago
http://labix.org/python-dateutil
which appears really impressive to me (and useful). python-dateutil +
datetime would be an equivalent replacement for DateTime.
Just for the logs: I gave up my work on
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-28 21:49 +0200:
On 28 Aug 2007, at 21:48 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-27 22:33 +0200:
... datetime use ...
My point was just that it's doable and has
been for a long time already.
Yes, it is possible (for a long
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
snip /
I believe that datetime is not even importable in TTW code
and datetime objects not accessible in TTW code -- at least,
they have not been until recently...
allow_module('datetime') is all you had to do. Ok, admittedly, pure-TTW
developers who can't or
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-27 22:33 +0200:
...
I believe that datetime is not even importable in TTW code
and datetime objects not accessible in TTW code -- at least,
they have not been until recently...
allow_module('datetime') is all you had to do. Ok, admittedly, pure-
TTW
On 28 Aug 2007, at 21:48 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-27 22:33 +0200:
...
I believe that datetime is not even importable in TTW code
and datetime objects not accessible in TTW code -- at least,
they have not been until recently...
allow_module('datetime')
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-8-26 20:31 +0200:
...
Conversion between both is pretty much trivial. However I have no idea
how this would solve the DateTime problem. So what are our DateTime
problems?
- an insane constructor with a parser trying to parse almost every
date
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-27 22:11 +0200:
...
In my personal opinion, we should
* use datetime for all the new stuff that we write,
* provide a convenient way to convert DateTime objects into datetime,
* create alternate APIs for all the APIs that work with DateTime objects
On 27 Aug 2007, at 22:25 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-8-27 22:11 +0200:
...
In my personal opinion, we should
* use datetime for all the new stuff that we write,
* provide a convenient way to convert DateTime objects into datetime,
* create alternate APIs
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:31:13 -0700, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not care about some incompatibilities if people have the chance
using the old version somehow (e.g. through a DT egg).
+1, for what it's worth. ;)
Dealing with the existing DateTime implementation has been pain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi,
perhaps the sun burned too long on my brain today but I investigated some
options for replacing DateTime with Python's datetime module. Zope 3 uses
datetime and we all know that the DateTime implementation sucks.
--On 25. August 2007 12:33:41 -0400 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi,
perhaps the sun burned too long on my brain today but I investigated
some options for replacing DateTime with Python's datetime module. Zope
3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 25. August 2007 12:33:41 -0400 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi,
perhaps the sun burned too long on my brain today but I investigated
some
Tres Seaver wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi,
perhaps the sun burned too long on my brain today but I investigated
some options for replacing DateTime with Python's datetime module. Zope
3 uses datetime and we all know that the DateTime implementation sucks.
Especially the timezone
19 matches
Mail list logo
