Message201932
Well, I don't know if this sways anything, but I was probably responsible, and I think my argument was something about not all timestamp sources having microseconds, and not wanting to emit the ".000000" in that case. If I could go back I'd probably do something else; after all str(1.0) doesn't return '1' either. But that's water under the bridge; "fixing" this is undoubtedly going to break a lot of code.
Maybe we can give isoformat() a flag parameter to force the inclusion or exclusion of the microseconds (with a default of None meaning the current behavior)? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-11-01 18:40:38 | gvanrossum | set | recipients:
+ gvanrossum, tim.peters, skip.montanaro, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray |
2013-11-01 18:40:37 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1383331237.96.0.659959471946.issue19475@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2013-11-01 18:40:37 | gvanrossum | link | issue19475 messages |
2013-11-01 18:40:37 | gvanrossum | create | |
|