• AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Would have been nice if they had just fixed it instead. Now I have to type more characters

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, the names imply that those should be TZ aware. Though I can understand the reasoning, as this change can silently break already broken code that kind of works, and would be a nightmare to fix in a large codebase.

      I also disagree with author, about naive datetime. I don’t think there is a good use case for them, and people who use them, do so because they are not aware of the issues.

      The only argument I saw was for micro performance improvements, which is kind of funny to care about when programming in python. Since it is implemented in C, the code removing the timezone likely takes more resources.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        I agree.

        The only use I can see for naive date times is you just read the date out of an old sql database, but it shouldn’t leave the function naive, it should be converted first.

        Python’s timezone handling is probably my only complaint about the language. I shouldn’t need to use libraries just to have timezones.

      • Jim@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        While it would be ideal to have all datetime fields in databases and other data stores be time zone aware, that is certainly not the case. Also, SQLite (and probably others) do not have great support for time zones and it’s recommended to store datetimes as UTC (typically unix timestamps).

        Deprecating utcnow was a good idea, but they should have replaced it with naive_utcnow. Oh well.