gh-118469: Add documentation for sqlite3 PEP-249 constructors #122091
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 |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -424,6 +424,40 @@ Module functions | |
| Note: *typename* and the name of the type in your query are matched | ||
| case-insensitively. | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: Date(year, month, day) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a date value. | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: Time(hour, minute, second) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a time value. | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: Timestamp(year, month, day, hour, minute, second) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a time stamp value. | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: DateFromTicks(ticks) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a date value from the given ticks | ||
| value (number of seconds since the epoch; see the documentation of the | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I assume it's the UNIX epoch and not Gregorian epoch? Can it be a fractional number of seconds or not? There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah the UNIX epoch.
This was taken from PEP-249. Should we get clarification there? There was a problem hiding this comment. I think it was not considered at that time. In general, we don't change PEPs (unless there is a real issue with the PEP I think, but I am not aware of a precedent). Best is to ask @erlend-aasland: should we leave it imprecise, or is there some assumptions that I'm not aware of? |
||
| standard Python :mod:`time` module for details). | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: TimeFromTicks(ticks) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a time value from the given ticks | ||
| value (number of seconds since the epoch; see the documentation of the | ||
| standard Python :mod:`time` module for details). | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: TimestampFromTicks(ticks) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object holding a time stamp value from the given | ||
| ticks value (number of seconds since the epoch; see the documentation of the | ||
| standard Python :mod:`time` module for details). | ||
|
|
||
| .. function:: Binary(string) | ||
|
|
||
| This function constructs an object capable of holding a binary (long) string | ||
| value. | ||
|
|
||
| .. _sqlite3-module-constants: | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
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.
Are the second allowed to be fractional or not? (same question for
Time())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.
In my tests, Doing something like this fails:
But this succeeds:
However, it is not mentioned in PEP-249. How should we handle that?
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.
Oh. I think should definitely be documented and the signature of
Timeshould be something likeTime(h, m, s[, ms])(check the syntax in the time module, I don't remember now).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.
Gotcha. Re-reading the issue, I believe the intention was to document these constructors per PEP-249. I'm not sure if this is more an implementation detail. Will wait for @erlend-aasland guidance.