-1 to moving anything The situation is confusing and moving things will add to that confusion for a significant length of time. What I would instead suggest is improving the docs. If I could look in one place to find any time function it would mitigate the fact that they're implemented in multiple places. --- Bruce (via android) On Jun 16, 2010 12:56 AM, "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@egenix.com> wrote: Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:01, Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> wrote:
On 15... -1.
Please note that the time module provides access to low-level OS provided services which the datetime module does not expose. You cannot seriously expect that an application which happily uses the time module (only) for its limited date/time functionality to have to be rewritten just to stay compatible with Python. Note that not all applications are interested in sub-second accuracy and a computer without properly configured NTP and good internal clock doesn't even provide this accuracy to begin with (even if they happily pretend they do by exposing sub-second floats). You might want to do that for Python4 and then add all those time module functions using struct_time to the datetime module (returning datetime instances), but for Python3, we've had the stdlib reorg already. Renaming time -> posixtime falls into the same category. The only improvement I could see, would be to move calendar.timegm() to the time module, since that's where it belongs (keeping an alias in the calendar module, of course). -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Jun 16 2010)
Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ mxODBC.Zope.Database.Ad... 2010-07-19: EuroPython 2010, Birmingham, UK 32 days to go
::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! :::: eGenix.com Software, ... Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ide...