- Python Home
- About
- News
- Documentation
- Downloads
- Community
- Foundation
- Developer's Guide
- Issue Tracker
- Issues
- Summaries
- User
- Administration
- Help
Issue3269
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.
Created on 2008-07-03 11:47 by nevgor, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| unnamed | nevgor, 2008-07-03 13:33 | |||
| unnamed | nevgor, 2008-07-03 14:03 | |||
| Messages (5) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg69192 - (view) | Author: Neven Goršić (nevgor) | Date: 2008-07-03 11:47 | |
strptime() allows 60 and 61 sec, but not 62 sec in arg. string
>>> s='02/28/2000 12:33:61 AM'
>>> time.strptime(s,'%m/%d/%Y %I:%M:%S %p')
(2000, 2, 28, 0, 33, 61, 0, 59, -1)
>>> s='02/28/2000 12:33:62 AM'
>>> time.strptime(s,'%m/%d/%Y %I:%M:%S %p')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#12>", line 1, in <module>
time.strptime(s,'%m/%d/%Y %I:%M:%S %p')
File "C:\Python25\lib\_strptime.py", line 330, in strptime
(data_string, format))
ValueError: time data did not match format: data=02/28/2000 12:33:62 AM
fmt=%m/%d/%Y %I:%M:%S %p
|
|||
| msg69198 - (view) | Author: Facundo Batista (facundobatista) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-07-03 13:19 | |
Minutes with 61 (0..60) and 62 (0..61) seconds are used to adjust the theoretical calendar because of small differences with real world rotation... Are you aware of any case where a minute with 63 seconds (0..62) should be used? |
|||
| msg69200 - (view) | Author: Neven Goršić (nevgor) | Date: 2008-07-03 13:33 | |
Thank you for your reply, although is not helpful for me. I use strptime() for datedate transformation and datatime boundaries checking and therefore I am not conserned in Reltivity theory. When someone in datetime table enter 02:61:38 it is sign for me to rise a warning and not to supposed that the gay is astrophysicist :) ------------------------- On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Facundo Batista <report@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Facundo Batista <facundo@taniquetil.com.ar> added the comment: > > Minutes with 61 (0..60) and 62 (0..61) seconds are used to adjust the > theoretical calendar because of small differences with real world > rotation... > > Are you aware of any case where a minute with 63 seconds (0..62) should > be used? > > ---------- > nosy: +facundobatista > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue3269> > _______________________________________ > |
|||
| msg69201 - (view) | Author: Facundo Batista (facundobatista) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-07-03 13:49 | |
Closing as invalid, two reasons: - Your original issue was that time.strptime() didn't allow 62 seconds, not that it allowed 60 or 61. - If you use it to validate input... how do you actually know that 03/25/2012 17:13:61 AM' is an invalid date? I suggest to bring this issue in the python list if you have further doubts. Thank you!! |
|||
| msg69202 - (view) | Author: Neven Goršić (nevgor) | Date: 2008-07-03 14:03 | |
- My original issue was that time.strptime() makes difference between 61 and
62 seconds
- 17h AM, 78 s, 128min everyone can easly transform correctly, I just wanted
to use function for
boundarie checking: rising error for 62 sec and not for 61 is confusing!
- I just wanted to point out that Python should be consistent: to provide
the same behaviour for 60,61 and 62 sec.
The conclusion is over as far as I am concerned.
I got the picture (you standpoint), and I hope, you too.
Thank you, once again,
Regards
Neven
----------------------
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Facundo Batista <report@bugs.python.org>
wrote:
>
> Facundo Batista <facundo@taniquetil.com.ar> added the comment:
>
> Closing as invalid, two reasons:
>
> - Your original issue was that time.strptime() didn't allow 62 seconds,
> not that it allowed 60 or 61.
>
> - If you use it to validate input... how do you actually know that
> 03/25/2012 17:13:61 AM' is an invalid date?
>
> I suggest to bring this issue in the python list if you have further
> doubts.
>
> Thank you!!
>
> ----------
> resolution: -> invalid
> status: open -> closed
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3269>
> _______________________________________
>
|
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:56:36 | admin | set | github: 47519 |
| 2008-07-03 14:03:56 | nevgor | set | files:
+ unnamed messages: + msg69202 |
| 2008-07-03 13:49:20 | facundobatista | set | status: open -> closed resolution: not a bug messages: + msg69201 |
| 2008-07-03 13:33:32 | nevgor | set | files:
+ unnamed messages: + msg69200 |
| 2008-07-03 13:19:43 | facundobatista | set | nosy:
+ facundobatista messages: + msg69198 |
| 2008-07-03 11:47:35 | nevgor | create | |


