compare against "the other" argument, we raise TypeError,
in order to prevent comparison from falling back to the
default (and worse than useless, in this case) comparison
by object address.
That's fine so far as it goes, but leaves no way for
another date/datetime object to make itself comparable
to our objects. For example, it leaves Marc-Andre no way
to teach mxDateTime dates how to compare against Python
dates.
Discussion on Python-Dev raised a number of impractical
ideas, and the simple one implemented here: when we don't
know how to compare against "the other" argument, we raise
TypeError *unless* the other object has a timetuple attr.
In that case, we return NotImplemented instead, and Python
will give the other object a shot at handling the
comparison then.
Note that comparisons of time and timedelta objects still
suffer the original problem, though.
This gives much the same treatment to datetime.fromtimestamp(stamp, tz) as
the last batch of checkins gave to datetime.now(tz): do "the obvious"
thing with the tz argument instead of a senseless thing.
tzinfo.fromutc() method. The C code doesn't implement any of this
yet (well, not the C code on the machine I'm using now), nor does
the test suite reflect it. The Python datetime.py implementation and
test suite in the sandbox do match these doc changes. The C
implementation probably won't catch up before Thursday (Wednesday is
a scheduled "black hole" day this week <0.4 wink>).
is not supported on sets. (Unfortunately, sorting a list of sets may
still return random results because it uses < exclusively, but for
sets that inly implements a partial ordering. Oh well.)
