[Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 16:50:21 -0500
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > I wonder how often this is needed. The only occurrences of year() in
> > > the entire Zope source that I found are in various test routines.
> > These methods and others are used a lot in presentation code,
> > which tends to be expressed in DTML or ZPT.
> > It's not uncommon to select/catagorize things by year or month.
> > I think most people would find individual date-part methods
> > a lot more natural than tuples.
> OK, that explains a lot. For this context I agree, although I think
> they should probably appear as (computed) attributes rather than
> methods. Properties seem perfect.
That's fine with me.
> > > I imagine
> > > that once we change strftime() to accept an abstract time object,
> > > you'll never need to call either timetuple() or year() -- strftime()
> > > will do it for you.
> > Maybe, if I use strftime, but I don't use strftime all that much.
> Maybe you should. :-)
I do when I can. But it often doesn't meet my needs.
> > I can certainly think of even formatting cases (e.g. internationalized
> > dates) where it's not adequate.
> Then a super-strftime() should be invented that *is* enough, rather
> than fumbling with hand-coded solutions.
I think we don't need a one-size-fits-all all-powerful date-time
formating solution. ;)
Jim Fulton mailto:email@example.com Python Powered!
CTO (888) 344-4332 http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org