On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:43:05 -0600 Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
I think strftime / strptime support is a low-priority concern on this topic, and can probably be discussed independently of the core nanosecond support.
Might be low-priority, but with %f support as a template, supporting something to specify nanoseconds should be pretty trivial. The hardest question will be to convince ourselves that we aren't choosing a format code which some other strftime/strptime implementation is already using.
In addition, ISTR that one of the use cases was analysis of datetime data generated by other applications which has nanosecond resolution.
One of the use cases is to deal with OS-generated timestamps without losing information. As long as you don't need to represent or parse those timestamps, strptime / strftime don't come into the picture. Regards Antoine.