Message114436
| Author |
belopolsky |
| Recipients |
belopolsky, brian.curtin, catherine, skip.montanaro |
| Date |
2010年08月20日.18:01:16 |
| SpamBayes Score |
3.0661722e-05 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1282327278.16.0.843754450557.issue9650@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Is there any reason not to include the strftime formatting codes
> in the docstrings of time.strftime and time.strptime?
I believe the reason is that time.strftime behavior is platform dependent, so "man strftime" is likely to produce more relevant documentation than "pydoc time.strftime". Python manual <http://docs.python.org/library/time.html?#time.strftime> lists ANSI C codes, but warns that "Additional directives may be supported on certain platforms, but only the ones listed here have a meaning standardized by ANSI C." It is likely that there are platforms where ANSI C subset does not behave in a fully compliant manner. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年08月20日 18:01:18 | belopolsky | set | recipients:
+ belopolsky, skip.montanaro, brian.curtin, catherine |
| 2010年08月20日 18:01:18 | belopolsky | set | messageid: <1282327278.16.0.843754450557.issue9650@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2010年08月20日 18:01:16 | belopolsky | link | issue9650 messages |
| 2010年08月20日 18:01:16 | belopolsky | create |
|