Add an optional tzinfo argument to datetime.combine() so that

 datetime.combine(d, t, info)

returns the same object as

 datetime.combine(d, t).replace(tzinfo=info)

but without creating an intermediate naive instance.

Guido's LGTM: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/datetime-sig/2016-July/000993.html

The second patch includes documentation changes and addresses review commments.

From review comments:

Lib/datetime.py:1482: def combine(cls, date, time, tzinfo=True):
On 2016/08/01 08:47:14, SilentGhost wrote:
> This strikes me as an odd default value, why not use a more conventional None?

This is the same default as used in the .replace() methods.  Arguably, a proper sentinel value would be a better choice, but I think True delivers better performance.  In any case, this is not something I would change without consulting with the PyPy folks.

See <http://bugs.python.org/review/27661/diff/18026/Lib/datetime.py#newcode1482>.

From review comments:

Lib/datetime.py:1482: def combine(cls, date, time, tzinfo=True):
On 2016/08/01 12:23:12, berkerpeksag wrote:
> On 2016/08/01 08:47:14, SilentGhost wrote:
> > This strikes me as an odd default value, why not use a more conventional
None?
> 
> Agreed. It would also be good to make it keyword-only.

tzinfo is not kw-only in the other constructors and I don't think it should be here.  Unlike "fold", tzinfo value is usually recognizable at the call site.  It is either called something like "tzinfo", "tz" or "New_York" or is a call such as 'tz.get('US/Eastern').

I would always prefer datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo) to  datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo=tzinfo).  datetime.combine(d, t, New_York) vs. datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo=New_York) is a closer call, but still the first form is readable enough.


See <http://bugs.python.org/review/27661/diff/18026/Lib/datetime.py#newcode1482>.

New changeset adce94a718e3 by Alexander Belopolsky in branch 'default':
Closes #27661: Added tzinfo keyword argument to datetime.combine.
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/adce94a718e3