You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The use of the arrow library was removed in #40 (#38), but then re-added in for the tests in f50cad5. So currently the m3u8 library and it's tests are using different time parsing functions.
Is there a reason for doing this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
leandromoreira
changed the title
Different time parsing funktions used in library vs test code
Different time parsing functions used in library vs test code
Oct 31, 2015
I don't know if there is any reason, can @Neon-Dlea help us here? ;) Anyway I think we should at least use the same time parsing functions, thanks @netrounds-fredrik
I guess the problem was Python compatibility. Python 2.6/2.7 did not have an easy way to compare dates with timezones. To solve it I created a class to represent a tzinfo to construct a timezone aware date. Thank you for opening this issue!
The use of the arrow library was removed in #40 (#38), but then re-added in for the tests in f50cad5. So currently the m3u8 library and it's tests are using different time parsing functions.
Is there a reason for doing this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: