-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.9k
gh-120266: Fix undefined _utcfromtimestamp
name in datetimetester
#120267
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.
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
Open
sobolevn
wants to merge
2
commits into
python:main
Choose a base branch
from
sobolevn:issue-120266
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -6604,7 +6604,7 @@ def nondst_folds(self): | |||||
for (_, prev_ti), (t, ti) in pairs(zip(self.ut, self.ti)): | ||||||
shift = ti[0] - prev_ti[0] | ||||||
if shift < ZERO and ti[1] == prev_ti[1]: | ||||||
yield _utcfromtimestamp(datetime, t,), -shift, prev_ti[2], ti[2] | ||||||
yield datetime.fromtimestamp(t, datetime.UTC), -shift, prev_ti[2], ti[2] | ||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
|
||||||
|
||||||
@classmethod | ||||||
def print_all_nondst_folds(cls, same_abbr=False, start_year=1): | ||||||
|
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was this causing test failures somewhere? I'm guessing not. It looks like the undefined identifier was introduced last year, in 38dc3f2, so I would have expected failures then. Perhaps we could drop the method entirely. I'm sure @pganssle would have a better idea on what's going on here.
As to the specific fix here, that seems valid. However, sometimes in tests we want to avoid specific code paths for certain test cases. It isn't clear to me if there would be any reason for to avoid calling
datetime.fromtimestamp()
directly here. If not then this change should be good to go.Regardless, I definitely agree that it looks like we can't just leave
_utcfromtimestamp
there. 😄There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah does this mean that
nondst_folds
is not finding anything? Or is it possible that we're just not using this whole class for something?In any case, this is not the right thing to do, because it is returning an aware datetime. I think
_utcfromtimestamp
was supposed to be an alias for something likelambda t: datetime(1970, 1, 1) + timedelta(seconds=t)
. I am fuzzy on the details now, but I think this kind of thing was one of the rare legitimate uses ofutcfromtimestamp
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nondst_folds
is not used at all. Quoting myself:Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Side effects?
cpython/Lib/test/datetimetester.py
Line 6614 in 8da5ca4
@sobolevn Even here?