From: Tim Peters Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:34:46 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Python's strftime implementation does strange things with the year, X-Git-Tag: v2.3c1~2924 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=83b85f1d6cce999e0d85f669df71a520632a4c87;p=thirdparty%2FPython%2Fcpython.git Python's strftime implementation does strange things with the year, such that the datetime tests failed if the envar PYTHON2K was set. This is an utter mess, and the datetime module's strftime functions inherit it. I suspect that, regardless of the PYTHON2K setting, and regardless of platform limitations, the datetime strftime wrappers will end up delivering nonsense results (or bogus exceptions) for any year before 1900. I should probably just refuse to accept years earlier than that -- else we'll have to implement strftime() by hand. --- diff --git a/Modules/datetimemodule.c b/Modules/datetimemodule.c index 73c17643a521..28f61bd29db4 100644 --- a/Modules/datetimemodule.c +++ b/Modules/datetimemodule.c @@ -3518,8 +3518,12 @@ time_strftime(PyDateTime_Time *self, PyObject *args, PyObject *kw) &PyString_Type, &format)) return NULL; + /* Python's strftime does insane things with the year part of the + * timetuple. The year is forced to (the otherwise nonsensical) + * 1900 to worm around that. + */ tuple = Py_BuildValue("iiiiiiiii", - 0, 0, 0, /* year, month, day */ + 1900, 0, 0, /* year, month, day */ TIME_GET_HOUR(self), TIME_GET_MINUTE(self), TIME_GET_SECOND(self),