From 83b85f1d6cce999e0d85f669df71a520632a4c87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tim Peters Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:34:46 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] 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. --- Modules/datetimemodule.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Modules/datetimemodule.c b/Modules/datetimemodule.c index 73c17643a52..28f61bd29db 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),