> -----Original Message----- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon....@python.org] On Behalf Of Elvis Pranskevichus > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:12 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Cc: Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:53:58 PM EDT Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > No, but the last time I suggested that that datetime types should > > satisfy the same invariants as numbers, namely > > T(repr(x)) == x, the idea was met will silence. I, on the other hand, > > am not very enthusiastic about named constructors such as > > date.isoparse(). Compared with date(s:str), this is one more method > > name to remember, plus the potential for abuse as an instance method. > > What is d.isoparse('2017-11-24')? > > Agreed. datetime(s:str) seems like a far more natural and consistent > choice.
It's inconsistent with the rest of the module. All other constructions of datetime objects are on classmethods. Why make parsing ISO time special? > > Elvis > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium- > list%40sdamon.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
