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

Updated to latest, string unix timestamp is not understood by 'get' #1117

Open
sebtrack opened this issue Jul 14, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Updated to latest, string unix timestamp is not understood by 'get' #1117

sebtrack opened this issue Jul 14, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@sebtrack
Copy link

Issue Description

import arrow

arrow.get('1657831049')

results in

arrow.parser.ParserError: Could not match input '1657831049' to any of the following formats: YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-M-DD, YYYY-M-D, YYYY/MM/DD, YYYY/M/DD, YYYY/M/D, YYYY.MM.DD, YYYY.M.DD, YYYY.M.D, YYYYMMDD, YYYY-DDDD, YYYYDDDD, YYYY-MM, YYYY/MM, YYYY.MM, YYYY, W.

worked beforehand but with the latest version it does not.

We would like to accept a lot of time formats and some of them are strings some of them are unix timestamps, so forcing a int/float conversion is unacceptable. It would be nice to use string unix timestamps.

System Info

  • 🖥 OS name and version: ubuntu
  • 🐍 Python version: 3.8
  • 🏹 Arrow version: 1.2.2
@sebtrack sebtrack added the bug label Jul 14, 2022
@sebtrack sebtrack changed the title Updated to latest string unix timestamp is not understood by 'get' Updated to latest, string unix timestamp is not understood by 'get' Jul 14, 2022
@anishnya
Copy link
Member

@krisfremen @systemcatch @jadchaar any insight on this?

@13MK3
Copy link

13MK3 commented Nov 14, 2022

From reading the release history, this behavior was intentionally changed in version 0.15.0 "to support the ISO 8601 basic format and to address bugs such as #447". Is this really something that people would want to revert?

@anishnya
Copy link
Member

@krisfremen @jadchaar @systemcatch could you elaborate more for @13MK3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants