Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'argument': 0.05; 'output': 0.05; 'that?': 0.05; 'indicating': 0.07; 'notice,': 0.07; 'skip:\\ 20': 0.07; 'tries': 0.07; 'string': 0.09; 'negative.': 0.09; 'oh,': 0.09; 'skip:\\ 10': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; '"-"': 0.16; "'''": 0.16; '10:05': 0.16; 'arbitrary.': 0.16; 'declaration': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'mine.': 0.16; 'positive,': 0.16; 'repr': 0.16; 'repr()': 0.16; 'slip': 0.16; 'subclass': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; '(but': 0.19; 'possible,': 0.19; 'thu,': 0.19; '>>>': 0.22; 'portion': 0.22; 'rules': 0.22; 'saying': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'days,': 0.24; 'hours,': 0.24; 'logical': 0.24; 'propose': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; '(for': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'point': 0.28; 'fixed': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; 'patch': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'mix': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'work.': 0.31; 'that.': 0.31; 'argue': 0.31; 'bad.': 0.31; 'follows': 0.31; 'yields': 0.31; 'everyone': 0.33; 'actively': 0.33; 'raw': 0.33; 'could': 0.34; 'subject: (': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'case,': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'like,': 0.36; 'representing': 0.36; 'next': 0.36; "didn't": 0.36; 'possible': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'changing': 0.37; 'positive': 0.37; 'pm,': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'days': 0.60; 'even': 0.60; 'negative': 0.60; 'no.': 0.61; 'took': 0.61; 'simple': 0.61; 'interest': 0.64; 'different': 0.65; 'taking': 0.65; 'hours': 0.66; 'mar': 0.68; 'legal': 0.71; 'prime': 0.74; 'day': 0.76; '"real': 0.84; 'short,': 0.84; 'situations,': 0.84; 'stability': 0.84; 'apparent': 0.91; 'to:none': 0.92; 'besides,': 0.93; 'suffer': 0.93; 'suited': 0.93 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=gbwGfEe+3P4KYPlSa+U/BtAUb8m8RxIGB997EhcU+Vg=; b=SNUN0Ns6/nsPBfbbn72iloTu/es+KT6xdUNmiUyXzAjRK3vz1FlY0a+ZyBV6CYwCHf X7MZhGaJkFoaIG8Lo19nmAFk47uQQC2St0u3V6OwR78OEATpsLXIjZFiQ39cYA5rHVNs R8AYMZmPfLF1N3LMuG3rSIZ36hAmzjpdRw1W3Kpd22icAo5000LwOv53/LL9cHQBunnO Rry2wiQiNOk6ETzwIcsyUR9JpygTstd8fsYj/G7VD5ks/zyBHJZ4DWntbikIupC3u70v pU/knsx0dQ0eWhem/aNrzZDcl2YEApe/RtvNy3daXwp6oMu8rxn4kIyBrxAtzKFCU+Zz RzaA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.129.133 with SMTP id nw5mr1282622pab.98.1395920035260; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:33:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53336df8$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 22:33:55 +1100 Subject: Re: YADTR (Yet Another DateTime Rant) From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 81 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1395920043 news.xs4all.nl 2958 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:55462 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:69184 On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote: > On 27.03.2014 11:44, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote: >>> Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string >>> representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to say >>> >>> 123 days, -2982 hours >>> >>> Yet Python doesn't (but chooses an equally braindead representation). >> >> It's not "equally braindead", it follows a simple and logical rule: >> Only the day portion is negative. That might not be perfectly suited >> to all situations, but it does mean that adding and subtracting whole >> days will never change the representation of the time. That's a >> reasonable promise. > > Why would the stability of the *string* output of the time > representation be of any interest whatsoever? Do you have any even > halfways reasonable usecase for that? > >> What you propose is completely arbitrary, > > No. What I propose is that for t > 0 this holds: > > "-" + str(t) == str(-t) > > Which is far from arbitrary. When you said "equally braindead", I took that as indicating that the current representation is as braindead as "123 days, -2982 hours". My point is that it's not as arbitrary as that. Your "real proposal", if you like, is arguably better; but I'm just saying that the current one isn't arbitrary. > It follows "natural" rules of inverting > something (-abs(x) == -x), and it yields a (truly) human-readable form > of showing a timedelta. > > Please don't mix this up with the very apparent braindead proposal of > mine. In case you didn't notice, this was irony at work. The word > "braindead" I chose to describe the format should have tipped you off to > that. Yes, I knew that that was irony. I was taking argument with your declaration that the current form is just as bad. Taking it to a different type: The repr() of a string tries to be short, where possible, by using either single or double quotes, but won't use a raw representation, nor triple-quoted: >>> ' \' ' " ' " >>> " \" " ' " ' >>> ' \"\'\"\'\"\'\"\' ' ' "\'"\'"\'"\' ' >>> " \"\'\"\'\"\'\"\' " ' "\'"\'"\'"\' ' >>> ''' "'"'"'"' ''' ' "\'"\'"\'"\' ' >>> r' \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ' ' \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ' You could argue that representing a string as raw or triple-quoted would be "more correct", and yet the current repr is not arbitrary. The current form is not actively bad, even if it would be possible to find something better. >>> Where can I enter a PIP that proposes that all timedelta strings are >>> fixed at 123 days (for positive, non-prime amount of seconds) and fixed >>> at -234 days (for all negative or positive prime amount of seconds)? >> >> Doesn't need a PEP. Just subclass it or monkey-patch it and use it as >> you will. :) > > Nonono, you misunderstand: I want everyone to suffer under the braindead > representation, just as it is now! Oh, absolutely! In that case, just slip a patch into the next point release; people won't mind that changing in 3.4.1! ChrisA