-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...