Alexander Belopolsky <belopol...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Mark Dickinson <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: .. > - Should the PyDateTime_TimeZone struct definition go into > datetime.h, so that it's avaiable if you want to export any C-API > functions later on? > The original patch had this in the header file, but I moved it down to .c during dst debate. (See msg107186, point 3.) In the future we may add accessor functions to datetime.h, but this can be done without exposing the C struct. > - If you're not allowing subclassing, then presumably you don't need > the new_timezone / new_timezone_ex dance? > I agree, but if you don't mind, I will not change it at this point. There is a small chance that there will be an outcry for supporting subclassing and we will put that back in. Also, issue #2267 debate may result in removing the dance from other factory functions. (If the camp saying that the base class has no idea how to construct subclass instances wins.) Not a big deal either way, though. > - For clarity, please consider adding parentheses in: > > self = (PyDateTime_TimeZone *)type->tp_alloc(type, 0); > will do. PEP 7 does not mention that, but probably should. > - Whitespace issues: there are a couple of tabs in the source (at > around lines 810, 3388, 3390), and an overly long line (>79 > characters) at around line 3365. > Thanks. I thought I checked those. Maybe I should take over issue8912 as a community service. :-) > - Please add a brief comment before the added C functions (like > new_timezone_ex) explaining their purpose. > Will do. > - I wonder whether __ne__ should return the correct result (rather > than returning NotImplemented) for timezone instances. Will do. > OTOH, I agree with the decision not to allow timezone order > comparisons (though I bet they get requested at some point). I will support such request. It is very easy to implement (just remove the check that disallows it) and makes perfect sense. I left them out only because it is easier to add features than to remove in the future and I don't want to debate this now. > > - There doesn't seem to be any mention of timezone.min or timezone.max > in the docs. Is this deliberate? > Yes. Without ordering, having min and max is rather strange. I wanted to expose these for testing and will definitely document them when (and if) order comparisons are implemented. For now, let's keep them as easter eggs. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5094> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
