Message 121956 - Python tracker

➜

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.

Author	rbp
Recipients	belopolsky, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, ingo.janssen, rbp
Date	2010-11-21.18:24:39
SpamBayes Score	2.1796911e-06
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<[email protected]>
In-reply-to

Content
I was writing tests for this issue, when something struck me: ok, datetime(year, month, day, 24) is valid. But is datetime(year, month, day, 24, 1) valid? Or datetime(year, month, day, 24, 0, 0, 1)? I would say those aren't valid, although that makes checking forvalid hour values slightly weird (as in not straightforward): 24 is valid if minutes, seconds and microseconds are all 0, but invalid otherwise. What do you think?

I was writing tests for this issue, when something struck me: ok, datetime(year, month, day, 24) is valid. But is datetime(year, month, day, 24, 1) valid? Or datetime(year, month, day, 24, 0, 0, 1)?

I would say those aren't valid, although that makes checking forvalid hour values slightly weird (as in not straightforward): 24 is valid if minutes, seconds and microseconds are all 0, but invalid otherwise.

What do you think?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2010-11-21 18:24:42	rbp	set	recipients: + rbp, belopolsky, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, ingo.janssen
2010-11-21 18:24:42	rbp	set	messageid: <[email protected]>
2010-11-21 18:24:39	rbp	link	issue10427 messages
2010-11-21 18:24:39	rbp	create