Add an optional tzinfo argument to datetime.combine() so that datetime.combine(d, t, info) returns the same object as datetime.combine(d, t).replace(tzinfo=info) but without creating an intermediate naive instance. Guido's LGTM: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/datetime-sig/2016-July/000993.html

The second patch includes documentation changes and addresses review commments.

From review comments: Lib/datetime.py:1482: def combine(cls, date, time, tzinfo=True): On 2016/08/01 08:47:14, SilentGhost wrote: > This strikes me as an odd default value, why not use a more conventional None? This is the same default as used in the .replace() methods. Arguably, a proper sentinel value would be a better choice, but I think True delivers better performance. In any case, this is not something I would change without consulting with the PyPy folks. See <http://bugs.python.org/review/27661/diff/18026/Lib/datetime.py#newcode1482>.

From review comments: Lib/datetime.py:1482: def combine(cls, date, time, tzinfo=True): On 2016/08/01 12:23:12, berkerpeksag wrote: > On 2016/08/01 08:47:14, SilentGhost wrote: > > This strikes me as an odd default value, why not use a more conventional None? > > Agreed. It would also be good to make it keyword-only. tzinfo is not kw-only in the other constructors and I don't think it should be here. Unlike "fold", tzinfo value is usually recognizable at the call site. It is either called something like "tzinfo", "tz" or "New_York" or is a call such as 'tz.get('US/Eastern'). I would always prefer datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo) to datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo=tzinfo). datetime.combine(d, t, New_York) vs. datetime.combine(d, t, tzinfo=New_York) is a closer call, but still the first form is readable enough. See <http://bugs.python.org/review/27661/diff/18026/Lib/datetime.py#newcode1482>.

New changeset adce94a718e3 by Alexander Belopolsky in branch 'default': Closes #27661: Added tzinfo keyword argument to datetime.combine. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/adce94a718e3