Author Matthew.Earl
Recipients Arfrever, Martin.Morrison, Matthew.Earl, belopolsky, brett.cannon, docs@python, hynek, pconnell, pitrou, swalker, vstinner
Date 2013-10-24.16:13:21
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1382631201.48.0.0410832374995.issue19376@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Out of interest, what's the reason for accepting the time.strptime() version as a bug, but not datetime.datetime.strptime()? Is it that time.strptime() is meant to be a simple parsing from string to tuple (with minimal checks), whereas datetime.datetime.strptime() should represent an actual point in time, therefore extra validation is expected to occur?

If so I'm happy to either close or add a small note to the docs (I don't mind which.)
History
Date User Action Args
2013-10-24 16:13:21Matthew.Earlsetrecipients: + Matthew.Earl, brett.cannon, belopolsky, pitrou, vstinner, Arfrever, swalker, docs@python, hynek, Martin.Morrison, pconnell
2013-10-24 16:13:21Matthew.Earlsetmessageid: <1382631201.48.0.0410832374995.issue19376@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-10-24 16:13:21Matthew.Earllinkissue19376 messages
2013-10-24 16:13:21Matthew.Earlcreate