Author loewis
Recipients Arfrever, eric.araujo, gvanrossum, larry, loewis, maubp, ncoghlan, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, rosslagerwall, shaurz, vstinner
Date 2012-03-13.16:44:00
SpamBayes Score 7.5797e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <4F5F794F.2030208@v.loewis.de>
In-reply-to <1331645214.24.0.106742603471.issue14127@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> I don't want to remove os.futimens() and os.utimensat() because they add a feature: UTIME_NOW and UTIME_OMIT flags.

I'm not sure how this could work: UTIME_NOW and UTIME_OMIT have 
typically values such as ((1l << 30) - 2l) which could be mistaken
as a time stamp if there is a flat nanosecond value.

There would be ways to solve this, of course: not passing the
value should be considered as UTIME_OMIT, and passing -1 may
be treated as UTIME_NOW.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-03-13 16:44:01loewissetrecipients: + loewis, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, pitrou, vstinner, larry, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, maubp, shaurz, rosslagerwall, python-dev
2012-03-13 16:44:01loewislinkissue14127 messages
2012-03-13 16:44:00loewiscreate