Re: [Datetime-SIG] PEP-495 - Strict Invalid Time Checking
On 08/27/2015 06:51 AM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
""" In CPython, any non-integer value of fold [passed to replace()] will raise a TypeError , but other implementations may allow the value None to behave the same as when fold is not given. """
I am fine with removing this text and leaving fold=None option open for the future PEPs to explore.
Sounds like a good compromise. Thank you. -- ~Ethan~
Honestly, rather than weasel-wording the PEP to keep the option open to assign a different meaning to fold=None in the future, whatever semantics people would like should just be given a new keyword or a new method. On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
On 08/27/2015 06:51 AM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
"""
In CPython, any non-integer value of fold [passed to replace()] will raise a TypeError , but other implementations may allow the value None to behave the same as when fold is not given. """
I am fine with removing this text and leaving fold=None option open for the future PEPs to explore.
Sounds like a good compromise. Thank you.
-- ~Ethan~ _______________________________________________ Datetime-SIG mailing list Datetime-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/datetime-sig The PSF Code of Conduct applies to this mailing list: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
participants (2)
-
Ethan Furman -
Guido van Rossum