[Datetime-SIG] PEP-495 - Strict Invalid Time Checking
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Fri Aug 28 04:09:13 CEST 2015
Honestly, rather than weasel-wording the PEP to keep the option open to
assign a different meaning to fold=None in the future, whatever semantics
people would like should just be given a new keyword or a new method.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> On 08/27/2015 06:51 AM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
>> In CPython, any non-integer value of fold [passed to replace()] will
>> raise a TypeError , but other implementations may allow the value None to
>> behave the same as when fold is not given.
>> I am fine with removing this text and leaving fold=None option open for
>> the future PEPs to explore.
> Sounds like a good compromise. Thank you.
> Datetime-SIG mailing list
> Datetime-SIG at python.org
> The PSF Code of Conduct applies to this mailing list:
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Datetime-SIG