[Datetime-SIG] PEP 495 Q & A
alexander.belopolsky at gmail.com
Sun Aug 23 04:42:15 CEST 2015
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Alexander Belopolsky <
alexander.belopolsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Tim Peters <tim.peters at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm on board with fold=0 and fold=1. I only hated "fold" when it was
>> False and True. Now we're indexing a theoretically unbounded sequence
>> of folds by an ordinal, which makes perfect sense - the later the
>> time, the larger the ordinal ;-)
> Great! I'll let it simmer for a few days and start making the change in
> the PEP and the code.
> I don't think it will be right to call it a "flag" anymore. What will be
> the right word: a fold index?
As an added benefit, we can get rid of the "ambiguous time" tongue-twister
and call those intervals "two-fold".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Datetime-SIG