Hi Chris, sorry for the top-posting; replying from my phone. My test implementation works for me on Python 2.7, see http://repl.it/9Wz Notice especially the last few assertions, where normal datetime objects are on the LHS. Regards, Yawar On 2015-01-29, at 2:04, Chris Barker <chris.barker@noaa.gov> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Yawar Amin <yawar.amin@gmail.com> wrote:
Cool, the comparison operator logic looks very similar to mine:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/python-ideas/G3jeWoa6h14/ELpDLFu28QcJ
Did you get it to work both ways? i.e.
datetime.neg_inf < datetime.now()
and
datetime.now() > datetime.neg_inf
I had trouble with that, because the regular datetime doesn't know how to compare itself to a neg_inf object.
I believe the ideal design is the following type hierarchy:
datetime_base datetime_neg_inf datetime_pos_inf datetime
But in the interests of pragmatism, I think this one can be made to work:
datetime datetime_neg_inf datetime_pos_inf
yup -- should work.
and you could add class methods to the datetime object, so you could do:
datetime.neg_inf() and datetime.pos_inf()
The advantage to this is that we don't have to switch everything over to using a new derived type--just use the normal datetime for the majority of cases where we don't need inifinity dates.
And it could be a third part package, too. -- particularly good for backward compatibility.
-Chris
--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer
Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception
Chris.Barker@noaa.gov