From 528ca53b7455b3307cb0e3f097ae951191521ba8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tim Peters <tim.peters@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:30:50 +0000
Subject: SF bug #1028306:  date-datetime comparison

Treat comparing a date to a datetime like a mixed-type comparison.
---
 Lib/test/test_datetime.py | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 Misc/NEWS                 | 10 ++++++++++
 Modules/datetimemodule.c  | 12 +++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Lib/test/test_datetime.py b/Lib/test/test_datetime.py
index 2a6aca2..ab7bd71 100644
--- a/Lib/test/test_datetime.py
+++ b/Lib/test/test_datetime.py
@@ -3151,6 +3151,48 @@ class TestTimezoneConversions(unittest.TestCase):
             fstart += HOUR
 
 
+#############################################################################
+# oddballs
+
+class Oddballs(unittest.TestCase):
+
+    def test_bug_1028306(self):
+        # Trying to compare a date to a datetime should act like a mixed-
+        # type comparison, despite that datetime is a subclass of date.
+        as_date = date.today()
+        as_datetime = datetime.combine(as_date, time())
+        self.assert_(as_date != as_datetime)
+        self.assert_(as_datetime != as_date)
+        self.assert_(not as_date == as_datetime)
+        self.assert_(not as_datetime == as_date)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_date < as_datetime)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_datetime < as_date)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_date <= as_datetime)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_datetime <= as_date)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_date > as_datetime)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_datetime > as_date)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_date >= as_datetime)
+        self.assertRaises(TypeError, lambda: as_datetime >= as_date)
+
+        # Neverthelss, comparison should work with the base-class (date)
+        # projection if use of a date method is forced.
+        self.assert_(as_date.__eq__(as_datetime))
+        different_day = (as_date.day + 1) % 20 + 1
+        self.assert_(not as_date.__eq__(as_datetime.replace(day=
+                                                     different_day)))
+
+        # And date should compare with other subclasses of date.  If a
+        # subclass wants to stop this, it's up to the subclass to do so.
+        date_sc = SubclassDate(as_date.year, as_date.month, as_date.day)
+        self.assertEqual(as_date, date_sc)
+        self.assertEqual(date_sc, as_date)
+
+        # Ditto for datetimes.
+        datetime_sc = SubclassDatetime(as_datetime.year, as_datetime.month,
+                                       as_date.day, 0, 0, 0)
+        self.assertEqual(as_datetime, datetime_sc)
+        self.assertEqual(datetime_sc, as_datetime)
+
 def test_suite():
     allsuites = [unittest.makeSuite(klass, 'test')
                  for klass in (TestModule,
@@ -3163,6 +3205,7 @@ def test_suite():
                                TestTimeTZ,
                                TestDateTimeTZ,
                                TestTimezoneConversions,
+                               Oddballs,
                               )
                 ]
     return unittest.TestSuite(allsuites)
diff --git a/Misc/NEWS b/Misc/NEWS
index 1ade365..fcc52d7 100644
--- a/Misc/NEWS
+++ b/Misc/NEWS
@@ -22,6 +22,16 @@ Extension modules
 Library
 -------
 
+- SF bug #1028306:  Trying to compare a ``datetime.date`` to a
+  ``datetime.datetime`` mistakenly compared only the year, month and day.
+  Now it acts like a mixed-type comparison:  ``False`` for ``==``,
+  ``True`` for ``!=``, and raises ``TypeError`` for other comparison
+  operators.  Because datetime is a subclass of date, comparing only the
+  base class (date) members can still be done, if that's desired, by
+  forcing using of the approprate date method; e.g.,
+  ``a_date.__eq__(a_datetime)`` is true if and only if the year, month
+  and day members of ``a_date`` and ``a_datetime`` are equal.
+
 - bdist_rpm now supports command line options --force-arch,
   {pre,post}-install,  {pre,post}-uninstall, and
   {prep,build,install,clean,verify}-script.
diff --git a/Modules/datetimemodule.c b/Modules/datetimemodule.c
index ee7387c..6312e21 100644
--- a/Modules/datetimemodule.c
+++ b/Modules/datetimemodule.c
@@ -4075,7 +4075,17 @@ datetime_richcompare(PyDateTime_DateTime *self, PyObject *other, int op)
 	int offset1, offset2;
 
 	if (! PyDateTime_Check(other)) {
-		if (PyObject_HasAttrString(other, "timetuple")) {
+		/* If other has a "timetuple" attr, that's an advertised
+		 * hook for other classes to ask to get comparison control.
+		 * However, date instances have a timetuple attr, and we
+		 * don't want to allow that comparison.  Because datetime
+		 * is a subclass of date, when mixing date and datetime
+		 * in a comparison, Python gives datetime the first shot
+		 * (it's the more specific subtype).  So we can stop that
+		 * combination here reliably.
+		 */
+		if (PyObject_HasAttrString(other, "timetuple") &&
+		    ! PyDate_Check(other)) {
 			/* A hook for other kinds of datetime objects. */
 			Py_INCREF(Py_NotImplemented);
 			return Py_NotImplemented;
-- 
cgit v0.12