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 - [email protected]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
