On 2020-07-06, Frank Millman <fr...@chagford.com> wrote: > On 2020-07-06 2:06 PM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote: >> While I agree entirely with your point, there is however perhaps room >> for a bit more helpfulness from the json module. There is no sensible >> reason I can think of that it refuses to serialize sets, for example. >> Going a bit further and, for example, automatically calling isoformat() >> on date/time/datetime objects would perhaps be a bit more controversial, >> but would frequently be useful, and there's no obvious downside that >> occurs to me. > > I may be missing something, but that would cause a downside for me. > > I store Python lists and dicts in a database by calling dumps() when > saving them to the database and loads() when retrieving them. > > If a date was 'dumped' using isoformat(), then on retrieval I would not > know whether it was originally a string, which must remain as is, or was > originally a date object, which must be converted back to a date object. > > There is no perfect answer, but my solution works fairly well. When > dumping, I use 'default=repr'. This means that dates get dumped as > 'datetime.date(2020, 7, 6)'. I look for that pattern on retrieval to > detect that it is actually a date object.
There is no difference whatsoever between matching on the repr output you show above and matching on ISO-8601 datetimes, except that at least ISO-8601 is an actual standard. So no, you haven't found a downside. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
