Re: datetime module enhancements

On 3/9/07, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/9/07, Guido van Rossum <guido <at> python.org> wrote:
> > On 3/9/07, skip <at> pobox.com <skip <at> pobox.com> wrote:
> > > The range of datetime objects far exceeds that of the current Unix
> > > timestamp.  Given that the range of current (32-bit) Unix timestamps is
> > > approximately 1970 to 2038, What would the output of this be?
> > >
> > >     dt = datetime.datetime(3000, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0)
> > >     print dt.totimestamp()
> > >     dt = datetime.datetime(1900, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0)
> > >     print dt.totimestamp()
> >
> > If you extend the range to 64 bits there's no problem: the first
> > should print 32503680000, the second -2208988800.
>
> I think it should be a ValueError, given that the programmer is very
> likely to further use the returned timestamp to for example insert
> stuff in a database. Unix timestamps are not unambiguously defined for
> any years other than 1970 to 2038 imho.

But they will be. And they already are on some platforms. The database
should raise an OverflowError if a timestamp is out of range, but it
would be unpythonic to limit those outcomes to 32 bits.

--

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev <at> python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org