David Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: ----- "Alexander Belopolsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexander Belopolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the > comment: > > I would like to voice my opposition the totimestamp method. > > Representing time as a float is a really bad idea (originated at > Microsoft as I have heard). In addition to the usual numeric problems > when dealing with the floating point, the resolution of the floating > point timestamp varies from year to year making it impossible to > represent high resolution historical data. > > In my opinion both time.time() returning float and > datetime.fromtimestamp() taking a float are both design mistakes and > adding totimestamp that produces a float will further promote a bad > practice.
The point for me is that having to interact with Microsoft systems that require times means that the conversions have to be done. Is it better to have everybody re-implement this, with their own bugs, or to have a standard implementation? I think it's clearly better to have it as a method on the object. Of course, we should put docs in describing the pitfalls of this approach... _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue2736> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
