Skip to content

bpo-34512: Document platform-specific strftime() behavior for non-ASC… #8948

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
taleinat merged 2 commits into from
Jan 12, 2019
Merged

bpo-34512: Document platform-specific strftime() behavior for non-ASC… #8948

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
daea9d2
bpo-34512: Document platform-specific strftime() behavior for non-ASC…
Aug 26, 2018
bca4193
Fix wording based on review
Sep 27, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions Doc/library/datetime.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2029,6 +2029,12 @@ calls the platform C library's :func:`strftime` function, and platform
variations are common. To see the full set of format codes supported on your
platform, consult the :manpage:`strftime(3)` documentation.

For the same reason, handling of format strings containing Unicode code points
that can't be represented in the charset of the current locale is also
platform-dependent. On some platforms such code points are preserved intact in
the output, while on others ``strftime`` may raise :exc:`UnicodeError` or return
an empty string instead.

@izbyshev izbyshev Aug 26, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I haven't mentioned surrogate code points and surrogateescape error handler. Not sure whether we want to go to that level of detail.

time module docs should also be changed when/if we reach consensus on the wording.

@taleinat taleinat Sep 27, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I tend to agree that we should avoid mentioning surrogates given the proposed wording.

The following is a list of all the format codes that the C standard (1989
version) requires, and these work on all platforms with a standard C
implementation. Note that the 1999 version of the C standard added additional
Expand Down