This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

作者 belopolsky
收信人 Jay.Taylor, Neil Muller, amaury.forgeotdarc, andersjm, belopolsky, catlee, davidfraser, erik.stephens, guettli, hodgestar, jribbens, mark.dickinson, ping, pitrou, r.david.murray, steve.roberts, tim.peters, tomster, vivanov, vstinner, werneck
日期 2011-04-05.00:29:50
SpamBayes Score 1.875757e-05
Marked as misclassified
Message-id <BANLkTi=aP5GU8=AnxUkcAcMjKYCs2Za+2g@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1301953325.82.0.162674835519.issue2736@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
内容
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Jay Taylor <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
..
> I couldn't agree more with ping's position on this.

Adding votes to a tracker issue without a working patch will not move
it any further.   There are several committers besides me in the nosy
list including the original author of the datetime module.  If it was
such a universally desired feature as Ka-Ping makes it sound, it would
be committed long before I became the maintainer of the datetime
module.

>  It is against the spirit of what Python has set out to be, and the blocking needs to stop.

I don't think any committer has a power to *block* a patch.  I
certainly don't.  If  Ka-Ping wants to add a feature over my
objections, it is well within his power to do so. (Note that I
objected to timedelta.total_seconds(), but it was added nevertheless.)
 It would be best, however to bring this to python-dev or python-ideas
first.

> Any chance we could get a .epoch() function into python 2.7 as well?

No.
历史
日期 用户 动作 参数
2011-04-05 00:29:51belopolsky修改recipients: + belopolsky, tim.peters, ping, jribbens, guettli, amaury.forgeotdarc, mark.dickinson, davidfraser, pitrou, andersjm, catlee, vstinner, tomster, werneck, hodgestar, Neil Muller, erik.stephens, steve.roberts, r.david.murray, vivanov, Jay.Taylor
2011-04-05 00:29:50belopolsky链接issue2736 messages
2011-04-05 00:29:50belopolsky创建