Message76351
| Author |
belopolsky |
| Recipients |
Neil Muller, andersjm, belopolsky, davidfraser, hodgestar, tebeka, vstinner, werneck |
| Date |
2008年11月24日.18:07:44 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.016129915 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<d38f5330811241007k5b52de8ftbe7e984f1576b760@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<200811241832.56431.victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> |
| Content |
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:34 PM, STINNER Victor <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
..
>> I would still prefer totimestamp()->(int, int) returning (sec, usec)
>> tuple. The important benefit is that such totimestamp() will not
>> loose information
>
> Right, I prefer your solution ;-)
>
Great! What do you think about extending fromtimestamp(timestamp[,
tz]) and utcfromtimestamp(timestamp) to accept a tuple for the
timestamp?
Also, are you motivated enough to bring this up on python-dev to get a
community and BDFL blessings? I think this has a chance to be
approved. |
|