Author p-ganssle
Recipients josh.r, jujuwoman, p-ganssle
Date 2018-07-05.15:29:42
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1530804582.68.0.56676864532.issue33381@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I don't believe this is a duplicate if #32267, which is actually about the %z directive.

I think the implementation here is correct and the documentation is semi-correct, it depends on how you look at it, consider:

>>> datetime(2018, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1).strftime('%f')
'000001'

>>> datetime(2018, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 100000).strftime('%f')
'100000'

In the first case "1" got expanded to "000001" and "100000" was printed as-is. However, when you interpret it as being *after* the decimal point, you would consider the first one to not be zero-padded at all and the second one to be zero-padded on the right.

I think the documentation can just be changed to "zero-padded to 6 digits" without specifying left or right.
History
Date User Action Args
2018-07-05 15:29:42p-gansslesetrecipients: + p-ganssle, josh.r, jujuwoman
2018-07-05 15:29:42p-gansslesetmessageid: <1530804582.68.0.56676864532.issue33381@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2018-07-05 15:29:42p-gansslelinkissue33381 messages
2018-07-05 15:29:42p-gansslecreate