On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 06:33:28 -0700, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

- -1:  anybody who is using the string representations for comparison is
mising the point:  those values are "display only."  they should be
using the forms which return real datetime obojects.


Yeah, I wasn't arguing for changing the DC element accessors, I know those should be strings.

The ceiling / floor date bits are there to support indexing / sorting,
and therefore comparison.

We could tackle this by adding an argument, 'use_ceiling' / 'use_floor'
to those methods, defaulting it to True for this release, and then
switch the default and add a deprecation warning in the next release.
Or we could add new APIs, e.g. 'effectiveOrNone', 'expiresOrNone' and
leave the current methods alone.

If you want to talk about remonving those  bits, you still have to deal
with special casing the bits where the content object has a real None
value.  For indexing, we can use the support provided already by
DateRangeIndex for handling "open" intervals (the real case that the
floor / ceiling were meant to handle).

OK, I just wanted to compare two dates like I do in Python, and display a result accordingly. So would the "correct" thing to do here make it support None as a return value, but switch to DateRangeIndex?

--
Alexander Limi ยท http://limi.net

_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf

See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to