Em sábado, 14 de março de 2009 às 13:59:41 UTC-3, Casey escreveu:
> How about:
> from datetime import date, timedelta
> # Define the weekday mnemonics to match the date.weekday function
> (MON, TUE, WED, THU, FRI, SAT, SUN) = range(7)
> def workdays(start_date, end_date, whichdays=(MON,TUE,WED,THU,FRI)):
> '''
> Calculate the number of working days between two dates inclusive
> (start_date <= end_date).
> The actual working days can be set with the optional whichdays
> parameter
> (default is MON-FRI)
> '''
> delta_days = (end_date - start_date).days + 1
> full_weeks, extra_days = divmod(delta_days, 7)
> # num_workdays = how many days/week you work * total # of weeks
> num_workdays = (full_weeks + 1) * len(whichdays)
> # subtract out any working days that fall in the 'shortened week'
> for d in range(1, 8 - extra_days):
> if (end_date + timedelta(d)).weekday() in whichdays:
> num_workdays -= 1
> return num_workdays
Could it include the holidays in Brazil?

On Wednesday, August 18, 2021 at 8:57:20 PM UTC+1, Bruno Lirio wrote:
> Em sábado, 14 de março de 2009 às 13:59:41 UTC-3, Casey escreveu:
> > How about:
> > from datetime import date, timedelta
> > # Define the weekday mnemonics to match the date.weekday function
> > (MON, TUE, WED, THU, FRI, SAT, SUN) = range(7)
> > def workdays(start_date, end_date, whichdays=(MON,TUE,WED,THU,FRI)):
> > '''
> > Calculate the number of working days between two dates inclusive
> > (start_date <= end_date).
> > The actual working days can be set with the optional whichdays
> > parameter
> > (default is MON-FRI)
> > '''
> > delta_days = (end_date - start_date).days + 1
> > full_weeks, extra_days = divmod(delta_days, 7)
> > # num_workdays = how many days/week you work * total # of weeks
> > num_workdays = (full_weeks + 1) * len(whichdays)
> > # subtract out any working days that fall in the 'shortened week'
> > for d in range(1, 8 - extra_days):
> > if (end_date + timedelta(d)).weekday() in whichdays:
> > num_workdays -= 1
> > return num_workdays
> Could it include the holidays in Brazil?

If you know what the holidays in Brazil are you can obviously extend this as needed, but it's a bit weird responding to a thread that's 12 yeasr old :)

On 2021-08-18 20:57, Bruno Lirio wrote:
> Em sábado, 14 de março de 2009 às 13:59:41 UTC-3, Casey escreveu:
>> How about:
>> from datetime import date, timedelta
>> # Define the weekday mnemonics to match the date.weekday function
>> (MON, TUE, WED, THU, FRI, SAT, SUN) = range(7)
>> def workdays(start_date, end_date, whichdays=(MON,TUE,WED,THU,FRI)):
>> '''
>> Calculate the number of working days between two dates inclusive
>> (start_date <= end_date).
>> The actual working days can be set with the optional whichdays
>> parameter
>> (default is MON-FRI)
>> '''
>> delta_days = (end_date - start_date).days + 1
>> full_weeks, extra_days = divmod(delta_days, 7)
>> # num_workdays = how many days/week you work * total # of weeks
>> num_workdays = (full_weeks + 1) * len(whichdays)
>> # subtract out any working days that fall in the 'shortened week'
>> for d in range(1, 8 - extra_days):
>> if (end_date + timedelta(d)).weekday() in whichdays:
>> num_workdays -= 1
>> return num_workdays
> Could it include the holidays in Brazil?
>
Yes. The algorithms calculates the number of working days, assuming no
holidays, so you'd then subtract any working days between the start and
end dates that are actually holidays.

Channeling unicode text experts and xml people:

I have xml entity with initial bytes ff fe ff fe which the file command says is
UTF-16, little-endian text.

I agree, but what should be done about the additional BOM.

A test output made many years ago seems to keep the extra BOM. The xml context is

xml file 014.xml
<!DOCTYPE doc [
<!ELEMENT doc (#PCDATA)>
<!ENTITY e SYSTEM "014.ent">
]>
<doc>&e;</doc

the entitity file 014.ent is bombomdata

b'\xff\xfe\xff\xfed\x00a\x00t\x00a\x00'

The old saved test output of processing is

b'<doc>\xef\xbb\xbfdata</doc>'

which implies seems as though the extra BOM in the entity has been kept and processed into a different BOM meaning utf8.

I think the test file is wrong and that multiple BOM chars in the entiry should have been removed.

Am I right?
--
Robin Becker

On 2021-08-19 14:07, Robin Becker wrote:
> Channeling unicode text experts and xml people:
>
> I have xml entity with initial bytes ff fe ff fe which the file command says is
> UTF-16, little-endian text.
>
> I agree, but what should be done about the additional BOM.
>
> A test output made many years ago seems to keep the extra BOM. The xml context is
>
>
> xml file 014.xml
> <!DOCTYPE doc [
> <!ELEMENT doc (#PCDATA)>
> <!ENTITY e SYSTEM "014.ent">
> ]>
> <doc>&e;</doc
>
> the entitity file 014.ent is bombomdata
>
> b'\xff\xfe\xff\xfed\x00a\x00t\x00a\x00'
>
> The old saved test output of processing is
>
> b'<doc>\xef\xbb\xbfdata</doc>'
>
> which implies seems as though the extra BOM in the entity has been kept and processed into a different BOM meaning utf8.
>
> I think the test file is wrong and that multiple BOM chars in the entiry should have been removed.
>
> Am I right?
>
The use of a BOM b'\xef\xbb\xbf' at the start of a UTF-8 file is a
Windows thing. It's not used on non-Windows systems. Putting it in the
middle, e.g. b'<doc>\xef\xbb\xbfdata</doc>', just looks wrong.

It looks like the contents of a UTF-8 file, with a BOM because it
originated on a Windows system, were read in without stripping the BOM
first.