On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I don't understand why people bother with this gentleman.


I did see constructive input from Anatoly on the bug tracker before.  I believe other developers did too.  Granted, in the last few years signal-to-noise ratio in his posts was rather low, but I usually ignore the "from:" header in the technical discussions.

I am genuinely interested in the ways to improve date/time formatting in Python.  There are certainly better ways than stftime.  For example, ICU has a date/time format syntax that is much more readable: instead of "%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S", ICU format is "yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss".

I don't think it is hard to find a way to introduce ICU format in datetime.__format__ while preserving backward compatibility.  For example, we may require that % is always "escaped" as '%' in ICU format
and the presence of unescaped % can trigger strftime interpretation.   


[1] http://userguide.icu-project.org/formatparse/datetime