Co-authored-by: Erlend E. Aasland <erlend@python.org>
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <1324225+hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Stan Ulbrych <89152624+StanFromIreland@users.noreply.github.com>
* %D support for strptime, including test and Doc update
* additional %D test
* change documentation example date for %D so it is more legible to non-US readers
* change testing date for %D so it is more legible to non-US readers
* mv News blurb to Library, consistent with previous %F change
* change invalid format code from %D to C-standard unused %!
* Fix erroneous and misleading example Doc to %y from %Y, use correct C99+ definition for C99 %D; update additional tests
---------
Co-authored-by: blurb-it[bot] <43283697+blurb-it[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* gh-70647: Better promote how to safely parse yearless dates in datetime.
Every four years people encounter this because it just isn't obvious.
This moves the footnote up to a note with a code example.
We'd love to change the default year value for datetime but doing
that could have other consequences for existing code. This documented
workaround *always* works.
* doctest code within note is bad, dedent.
* Update to match the error message.
* remove no longer referenced footnote
* ignore the warning in the doctest
* use Petr's suggestion for the docs to hide the warning processing
* cover date.strptime (3.14) as well
Functions that take timestamp or timeout arguments now accept any
real numbers (such as Decimal and Fraction), not only integers or floats,
although this does not improve precision.
* Clarify datetime `replace` documentation
In #115684, HopedForLuck noted that `datetime.date.replace()`
documentation was confusing because it looked like it would be changing
immutable objects.
This documentation change specifies that the `replace()` methods in
`datetime` return new objects. This uses similar wording to the
documentation for `datetime.combine()`, which specifies that a new
datetime is returned. This is also similar to wording for
`string.replace()`, except `string.replace()` emphasizes that a "copy"
is returned.
Resolves#115684.
* Include reviewer comments
Thanks Privat33r-dev for the comments!
---------
Co-authored-by: Paul Ganssle <1377457+pganssle@users.noreply.github.com>
Now the special comparison methods like `__eq__` and `__lt__` return
NotImplemented if one of comparands is date and other is datetime
instead of ignoring the time part and the time zone or forcefully
return "not equal" or raise TypeError.
It makes comparison of date and datetime subclasses more symmetric
and allows to change the default behavior by overriding
the special comparison methods in subclasses.
It is now the same as if date and datetime was independent classes.
It creates a modified copy of an object by calling the object's
__replace__() method.
It is a generalization of dataclasses.replace(), named tuple's _replace()
method and replace() methods in various classes, and supports all these
stdlib classes.
Using `datetime.datetime.utcnow()` and `datetime.datetime.utcfromtimestamp()` will now raise a `DeprecationWarning`.
We also have removed our internal uses of these functions and documented the change.
