[3.13] gh-70647: Better promote how to safely parse yearless dates in datetime. (GH-116179) #143038
Conversation
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
…datetime. (pythonGH-116179) * pythongh-70647: Better promote how to safely parse yearless dates in datetime. Every four years people encounter this because it just isn't obvious. This moves the footnote up to a note with a code example. We'd love to change the default year value for datetime but doing that could have other consequences for existing code. This documented workaround *always* works. * doctest code within note is bad, dedent. * Update to match the error message. * remove no longer referenced footnote * ignore the warning in the doctest * use Petr's suggestion for the docs to hide the warning processing * cover date.strptime (3.14) as well
This was referenced Dec 21, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Every four years people encounter this because it just isn't obvious.
This moves the footnote up to a note with a code example.
We'd love to change the default year value for datetime but doing
that could have other consequences for existing code. This documented
workaround always works.
(cherry picked from commit b8d3fdd)
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--143038.org.readthedocs.build/