There is:
datetime.date.today()
datetime.datetime.today()
datetime.datetime.now([tz])

But no:
datetime.time.now([tz])

Anatoly,

Didn't you just recently complain about the large number of functions in datetime module? (issue7584)

datetime.datetime.now().time() seems adequate to me.

What is your use case?

> What is your use case?

>>> from datetime import now, today
>>> now()
datetime.time ...
>>> today()
datetime.date ...

> Didn't you just recently complain about the large number of functions in datetime module?

About verbosity of datetime API to be exact, so it is a ratio of (API functions + required docs)/user code that makes required stuff done.

Anatoly,

msg107191 belongs to issue8903, not here and it is not a use case, but rather a demonstration of how the proposed feature would work.

My question is why would an application need current time without current date?  I feel providing time.now() may lead so people to call date.today() and time.now() separately instead of datetime.now() leading to interesting bugs.

One think I would consider an improvement over the current situation, would be to rename date.today() to date.now().  There are too many ways to spell the same thing:

date.today()
datetime.today()
datetime.now().date()

and no easy way to write a "how long ago" function that would work for both date and datetime:

def ago(t):
    t.now() - t

I need to correct myself: datetime.today() is not an alternative spelling of date.today(), but rather a function returning current datetime which subtly different from datetime.now().