Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

datetime.strptime accepts incompatible arguments #124549

Open
pganssle opened this issue Sep 25, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

datetime.strptime accepts incompatible arguments #124549

pganssle opened this issue Sep 25, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
extension-modules C modules in the Modules dir stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-bug An unexpected behavior, bug, or error

Comments

@pganssle
Copy link
Member

pganssle commented Sep 25, 2024

Bug report

Bug description:

If you over-specify a datetime strptime string, it seems that datetime.strptime when encountering a component that has been specified twice, will overwrite earlier values with more recent ones.

>>> datetime.strptime("200099", "%Y%y")
datetime.datetime(1999, 1, 1, 0, 0)

One approach would be to ban over-specified formats, but that would be a problem for someone who wants to, use a format like "%M %B" (e.g. something sortable by month number while also showing month name), so I think we don't want to do that.

Alternatively we could start raising an exception if you get different values from these two things, or possibly a warning.

Or we can just accept that if you use a weird format you should expect weird behavior.

CPython versions tested on:

CPython main branch

Operating systems tested on:

Linux

Linked PRs

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member

I'd be ok with raising exception, seems like it's a user error for passing these kind of conflicting format specifiers.

We could also start documenting this case, saying that the latest format specifiers that appears will prevail.

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member

Mariatta commented Oct 5, 2024

@pganssle I created a PR to document this weird behavior. I think it's still worth raising a warning though. #125009

@alliesw
Copy link

alliesw commented Dec 17, 2024

To avoid the issue where the last directive overwrites earlier values:
since more than one directive is needed, maybe split the string and parse the components manually (handling the split and parsing based on the length of the string)?
Maybe also apply custom logic to handle dynamic formats, especially if you encounter different scenarios with varying date formats.... (idk if your format is dynamic?)

@alliesw
Copy link

alliesw commented Dec 17, 2024

This is an example of what I'm getting at:

def parse_date(input_str):
    if len(input_str) == 6:  # 4-digit year followed by 2-digit year
        full_year = input_str[:4]
        short_year = input_str[4:]
        year_full = datetime.strptime(full_year, "%Y")
        year_short = datetime.strptime(short_year, "%y")
        return year_short.replace(year=year_full.year)  # Use full year from the first part
    elif len(input_str) == 4:  # Only 4-digit year
        return datetime.strptime(input_str, "%Y")
    else:
        raise ValueError("Invalid date format")

Example usage:

input_str = "200099"
parsed_date = parse_date(input_str)
print(parsed_date)  # datetime.datetime(1999, 1, 1, 0, 0)

@picnixz picnixz added stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir extension-modules C modules in the Modules dir labels Dec 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
extension-modules C modules in the Modules dir stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-bug An unexpected behavior, bug, or error
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants