Failure to recognise dates with time ranges

[noseboy]

"\n\n Wednesday 5th April 09.00 - 11.30\n Wednesday 5th April 15.00 - 17.30\n\n Friday 7th April 09.00 - 11.30"

-->

2009-04-05 00:00:00
2030-04-05 15:00:00
2030-04-07 09:00:00

[akoumjian]

This is kind of an advanced use case of #171 . What would be the preferred type of objects returned for this? Are you expecting two datetimes for each range? Or are you expecting a combination of a datetime and a timedelta?

[noseboy]

I think either would be reasonable as one can be generated from the other if needed.

…

On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 at 04:25, Alec Koumjian ***@***.***> wrote: This is kind of an advanced use case of #171 <#171> . What would be the preferred type of objects returned for this? Are you expecting two datetimes for each range? Or are you expecting a combination of a datetime and a timedelta? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAQ7RELHPH66DWIHGEYQRHDVXMZYZANCNFSM4DJSTU4A> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[noseboy]

However the fundamental issue is that it has not recognised the first part of the date correctly, allocating an incorrect year.

[akoumjian]

Sure, makes sense. That part should be fixable. The library starts by grabbing the largest possible chunks of date related strings and then attempts to find individual dates in there from those strings. Not working here, potentially getting thrown by the double set of hours with a single set of months and day of months.

…

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 5:32 AM noseboy ***@***.***> wrote: However the fundamental issue is that it has not recognised the first part of the date correctly, allocating an incorrect year. On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 at 10:30, Alexis Manning ***@***.***> wrote: > I think either would be reasonable as one can be generated from the other > if needed. > > On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 at 04:25, Alec Koumjian ***@***.***> > wrote: > >> This is kind of an advanced use case of #171 >> <#171> . What would be the >> preferred type of objects returned for this? Are you expecting two >> datetimes for each range? Or are you expecting a combination of a datetime >> and a timedelta? >> >> — >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub >> < #46 (comment) >, >> or unsubscribe >> < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAQ7RELHPH66DWIHGEYQRHDVXMZYZANCNFSM4DJSTU4A > >> . >> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: >> ***@***.***> >> > — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFTGJG6LDX6BVQKUH4BT7LVXOE2BANCNFSM4DJSTU4A> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>