Message246334
I'll let others fight this battle. In my view, introducing floating point timestamp method for datetime objects was a mistake. See issue #2736.
Specifically, I would like to invite Velko Ivanov to rethink his rant at msg124197.
If anyone followed his advise and started using timestamp method to JSON-serialize datetimes around 3.3, have undoubtedly being bitten by the present bug (but may not know it yet.)
For those who need robust code, I will continue recommending (dt - EPOCH)/timedelta(seconds=1) expression over the timestamp method and for JSON serialization (dt - EPOCH) // datetime.resolution to convert to integers and EPOCH + n * datetime.resolution to convert back. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-07-05 19:04:08 | belopolsky | set | recipients:
+ belopolsky, mark.dickinson, vstinner, larry, r.david.murray, ethan.furman, vivanov, tbarbugli, trcarden |
2015-07-05 19:04:08 | belopolsky | set | messageid: <1436123048.28.0.195723169486.issue23517@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-07-05 19:04:08 | belopolsky | link | issue23517 messages |
2015-07-05 19:04:08 | belopolsky | create | |
|