[Datetime-SIG] pytz vs. PEP 495 Was: PEP-431/495
ethan at stoneleaf.us
Mon Aug 24 22:55:31 CEST 2015
On 08/24/2015 01:44 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:28 PM, ISAAC J SCHWABACHER wrote:
>> I *really* hope the answer to this one is, "don't do that".
> That's not an option because people already *do*  that and they won't stop.
> Neither they will stop using datetime.combine()  or datetime.replace() 
> or tolerate if those methods start raising exceptions.
If the default is True (or False), then this won't be a problem. It will only be None when explicitly asked for.
`time` can just store the flag, and when it is combined with a date the flag should be checked and if None and the resulting datetime doesn't exist or is ambiguous an exception can be raised.
More information about the Datetime-SIG