Message106411
I have two questions about the proposed implementation:
1. Why not follow pytz lead and expose an instance of UTC rather than the UTC class itself?
2. Is there a real need to add a boolean argument to utcnow()? I think timedelta.now(UTC()) or with utc = UTC() timedelta.now(utc) seems to be a more obvious way to produce TZ aware datetime.
If a singleton instance utc is exposed instead of UTC class, I would suggest to change its repr to 'datetime.utc'.
On the patch itself, datetime_utcnow() is missing an error check for PyObject_IsTrue() return value:
>>> class X:
... def __nonzero__(self): raise RuntimeError
...
>>> datetime.utcnow(tz_aware=X())
datetime.datetime(2010, 5, 25, 2, 12, 14, 739720, tzinfo=<datetime.UTC object at 0x1015aab80>)
XXX undetected error
.. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-05-25 02:18:15 | belopolsky | set | recipients:
+ belopolsky, doerwalter, brett.cannon, ggenellina, pitrou, vstinner, ajaksu2, kawai, eric.araujo, rafe |
2010-05-25 02:18:14 | belopolsky | set | messageid: <1274753894.3.0.0455773830184.issue5094@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-05-25 02:18:11 | belopolsky | link | issue5094 messages |
2010-05-25 02:18:10 | belopolsky | create | |
|