On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Alexander Belopolsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote: >> TZ-less datetimes aren't going away and have >> plenty of use in contexts where the tz is either universally known or >> irrelevant. > > I agree, but in these contexts naive datetime objects almost always > represent local time in some "universally known or irrelevant" > timezone. I rarely see people use naive datetime objects to > represent UTC time and with timezone.utc added to datetime module > already the cost of supplying tzinfo to UTC datetime objects is low.
Maybe you need to get out more. :-) This is how datetime is represented in App Engine's datastore: https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/typesandpropertyclasses#DateTimeProperty (Note: These docs are unclear about whether a tzinfo attribute is present. The code is clear that it isn't.) > Based on tracker comments, I believe users ask for the following function: > > def timestamp(self, dst=-1): > "Return POSIX timestamp as float" > if self.tzinfo is None: > return _time.mktime((self.year, self.month, self.day, > self.hour, self.minute, self.second, > -1, -1, dst)) + self.microsecond / 1e6 > else: > return (self - _EPOCH).total_seconds() What do they want to set the dst flag for? > You seem to advocate for > > def utctimestamp(self): > return (self - _EPOCH).total_seconds() Not literally, because this would crash when self.tzinfo is None. I think I am advocating for the former but without the dst flag. > in addition or instead of timestamp(). In mxDT, utctimestamp() is > called gmticks(). > > Is this an accurate summary? -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com