On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Richard Hattersley <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi, > > My team are currently experimenting with extending datetime to allow > alternative, non-physical calendars (e.g. 360-day used by climate > modellers). Once we've got a handle on the options we'd like to > propose the extensions/changes back to NumPy. Obviously we'd like to > avoid wasted effort, so are there some aspects of datetime64 which are > more experimental than others? Is there a summary of unresolved issues > and/or plans for change? > > I believe datetime is already used by Pandas, so I don't think there will be major changes there. I'm not aware of open issues, but I could be wrong. The calenders are a bit independent, so I think the best procedure is to go ahead with your work. We want to leave some wiggle room since new features often need a little time to mature. That's how it looks to me anyway. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
