Opened 4 years ago
Closed 3 years ago
#32727 closed Bug (fixed)
Support spaces separaters in ISO-8601 datetimes between times and timezone strings
Reported by: | Ben Wilber | Owned by: | Ben Wilber |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Utilities | Version: | dev |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Triage Stage: | Ready for checkin | |
Has patch: | yes | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description (last modified by )
GitHub Pull Request: https://github.com/django/django/pull/14368
According to ISO-8601, there can be any number of whitespace characters between the time strings and timezone strings.
Unfortunately the spec isn't public, but here's the link anyway https://www.iso.org/iso-8601-date-and-time-format.html.
Examples:
This is a valid ISO-8601 datetime string:
2012-04-23T10:20:30.400-02
django.utils.dateparse.parse_datetime
parses this correctly.
This is also a valid ISO-8601 datetime string:
2012-04-23T10:20:30.400 -02
django.utils.dateparse.parse_datetime
does not parse this correctly and returns None
,
However, python-dateutil
parses it correctly. The difference is that Django uses a (brittle) regex to parse ISO-8601 datetime strings, and python-dateutil does not.
https://github.com/django/django/blob/main/django/utils/dateparse.py#L22
https://github.com/dateutil/dateutil/blob/master/dateutil/parser/isoparser.py
I recommend that Django:
1) Depend on python-dateutil for datetime string parsing
OR
2) Inline python-dateutils' parsing functions
As far as I know there is no regex that can parse the full spec of ISO-8601 datetime strings.
In the meantime, this is a patch to support (valid) whitespace characters between the seconds/millseconds part and the timezone string.
Change History (15)
comment:1 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:2 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:3 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:4 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:5 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:6 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:7 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:8 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:9 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:10 by , 4 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:11 by , 4 years ago
Triage Stage: | Unreviewed → Accepted |
---|---|
Version: | 3.2 → dev |
follow-up: 13 comment:12 by , 4 years ago
Has patch: | set |
---|
comment:13 by , 4 years ago
Replying to Claude Paroz:
Yes I'll start a thread on django devs. Thanks!
comment:14 by , 3 years ago
Owner: | changed from | to
---|---|
Status: | new → assigned |
Triage Stage: | Accepted → Ready for checkin |
Thanks for the patch. Ticket accepted at least to fix the space issue.
Could you please open a new thread with your rationales on the django-developers mailing list about the suggestion of depending on python-dateutil? Adding a new project dependency is no light decision, so it would need to be supported by a clear majority of developers.