[Datetime-SIG] Another round on error-checking

Tim Peters tim.peters at gmail.com
Thu Sep 3 18:39:56 CEST 2015


[Carl]
> ...
> So PEP 495 is already breaking the design of datetime, that tz-annotated
> datetimes operate internally on a naive time model. It _has_ to break
> that design, because it must introduce times that don't exist in that
> model. But it's choosing to change that design piecemeal and
> inconsistently instead of thoroughly and consistently.

It was never consistent for all possible uses:  as has been gone over
many times before, an aware datetime _can_ be viewed as being an
instant in "naive time", _or_ as an instant in civil time.  That's
solely in the programmer's head.  They may even view a single datetime
in both ways in different lines of code (I know I do - indeed, that's
the norm for me).  Python has no way to know which the programmer has
in mind; there is no way to _spell_ "I mean naive time" versus "I mean
civil time" for aware datetimes.  I believe Guido thinks that's "a
feature".  I think it's just "good enough" ;-)

Since the concept of "timezone conversion" doesn't exist in naive
time, a programmer asking for a timezone conversion can only have
"instant in civil time" in mind at the instant they ask for that
conversion (or invoke any other tzinfo method).  We're aiming to
accommodate that use, in a design that never put a wall between the
concepts from the start.

It's not ideal, but that's not really news ;-)


More information about the Datetime-SIG mailing list