num2pydate

[rcomer]

🚀 Pull Request

Hopefully a simple one!

Description

This PR exposes cftime's only_use_python_datetimes keyword in our num2date function and method. Also adds a convenience num2pydate function and method following cftime's num2pydate. This should make life easier for users who work exclusively with the standard calendar.

I couldn't find any existing tests for the num2date utility function, so added a new module. I've kept the new tests pretty minimal as they are really just checking that the args have been passed correctly to the next function down.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 91.651% when pulling dd42cf6 on rcomer:num2pydate into cc459a7 on SciTools:master.

[rcomer]

I'd like to get this into v3 if practicable, since users who might want it will likely have to update their num2date calls at v3 anyway.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #172 (4314ae5) into master (0ca0921) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #172      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.59%   90.63%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files           7        7              
  Lines         829      833       +4     
  Branches      105      105              
==========================================
+ Hits          751      755       +4     
  Misses         64       64              
  Partials       14       14              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cf_units/__init__.py	89.58% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0ca0921...4314ae5. Read the comment docs.

[trexfeathers]

Great idea @rcomer, just a tiny change for you...

[trexfeathers]

The pre-commit.ci failure is expected since I've activated it for this repo but the config file is still waiting in another PR.

[rcomer]

Thanks @trexfeathers, I have made that change and also updated the license headers on the new test modules to the new style. I assume the pre-commit failure just means I need to rebase again once #179 is merged?

Edit: "jinx!"

[trexfeathers]

OK @rcomer, I promise to not make any more conflicting changes to the code base. If you can rebase one last time, this is the next PR to go in!

[rcomer]

Thanks @trexfeathers! I have now rebased, blackened my changes and fixed some offending imports that were in the wrong order.