[Numpy-discussion] datetime64 format parameter?

John Salvatier jsalvati@u.washington....
Mon Feb 6 16:01:39 CST 2012


That makes sense.

I figured that ambiguity was the reason it was removed.

Thank you for the explanation. I'm a big fan of your work.

John

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Mark Wiebe <mwwiebe@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey John,
>
> NumPy doesn't provide this, because it's already provided by the
> datetime.date.strftime function in Python:
>
> http://docs.python.org/library/datetime.html#datetime.date.strftime
>
> One reason this format isn't supported automatically is that parsing
> "MM/dd/YY" is inherently ambiguous, and the convention is different in
> different parts of the world. The date "01/02/03" could be January 2nd 2003
> or February 3rd, 2001, for example. The datetime constructor follows the
> ISO 8601 standard for date and time formatting, which is unambiguous. This
> was specified in the datetime NEP, but the 1.6 implementation unfortunately
> hadn't followed that part of the spec.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:40 PM, John Salvatier <jsalvati@u.washington.edu
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there a way to specify a format for the datetime64 constructor? The
>> constructor doesn't have a doc. I have dates in a file with the format
>> "MM/dd/YY". datetime64 used to be able to parse these in 1.6.1 but the dev
>> version throws an error.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> John
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20120206/4919c25b/attachment.html 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list