28 Mar
2014
28 Mar
'14
4:30 p.m.
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:19:52 -0500
Skip Montanaro
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Alexander Belopolsky
wrote: Is it open to debate or is it now cast in stone?
I think the barrier for changing str() is lower than that for changing repr(), but I would be against any changes in this area. (I may have had a different view if ISO 8601 syntax for timedeltas was not so ugly. :-)
I think str() should be left alone. It's clear there is no one best str representation for timedelta objects.
But at least we could have one that isn't terribly confusing :-) Regards Antoine.