I'm having trouble with dates. This can be summed up in a couple of high level issues;
1. Date support in relational databases is insane, or at the best inconsistent.
As far as I can tell the ANSI SQL-92 standard defines date, time, interval and timestamp data types. Which doesn't help when SQL Server only implements something called 'datetime' - at least I think so, have you tried accessing any sort of manual for a Microsoft product online? Blimey, I thought billg had embraced this web thing years ago. Oracle has the 'date' data type (which is actually a time stamp) and MySQL, well they've gone and outdone everyone by implementing DATETIME, DATE, TIMESTAMP, TIME, and YEAR.
2. The Python DB-API does not cope with date data type ambiguity well.
When it comes to the date question the Python DB-API states (and I quote) " ... may use mx.DateTime", which if you ask me isn't much of a standard. This needs to change so that all DB-API modules return consistent datetime objects, not such a big issue as datetime has been part of the standard library since, what, Python 2.3?
Sadly even if we fix this it won't work with Sqlite as it doesn't consistently support data typing. In my experiments regardless of what sort of date you insert into the database you get a unicode string back. Don't believe me? Try this in Python 2.5;
>>> from sqlite3 import dbapi2 >>> db = dbapi2.connect('test_db') >>> cursor = db.cursor() >>> cursor.execute('create table date_test (id integer not null primary key autoincrement, sample_date DATE NOT NULL)' >>> stmt = "INSERT INTO date_test (sample_date) VALUES (?)" >>> cursor.execute(stmt, (1234, )) >>> import datetime >>> cursor.execute(stmt, (datetime.date(2008, 3, 10), )) >>> cursor.execute(stmt, ('My name is Earl', )) >>> db.commit() >>> cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM date_test") >>> results = cursor.fetchall() >>> for item in results: ... print item, type(item) 1234
2008-03-10 My name is Earl >>>
But note that it is fine for integers.
3. The people writing the Python standard library modules are on crack.
O.K. I'll accept that maybe the module authors aren't on full strength crack, because the time module just exposes underlying posix functions. But the people who wrote those were on something strong and hallucinogenic. I table the following function signatures from section 14.2 of the Python Library Reference 2.5 as an example;
strftime(format[, t ]) strptime(string[, format ])
This has bitten me twice in the last twenty four hours and frankly I'm not happy.
I appreciate that there are historical reasons for having inconsistent function signatures but can someone please fix this in Python 3.0. All we need is a single module that can access the underlying system clock and then convert between a number of different representations of that and other epoch driven dates. How hard can it be? As far as I can tell this is not part of the proposed standard library re-organisation. I think it should be.