unix_time() with start_datetime crashes with OverflowError

[sr-verde]

• Faker version: 13.12.0
• OS: Linux 5.18.1-arch1-1

I want to create two unix timestamps: One with any value and the other one with a value higher than the first one (minimal example below). Does not work but crashes with an OverflowError (Traceback below).

Steps to reproduce

Create a minimal example:

from faker import Faker

fake = Faker()
Faker.seed(0)

unix_time_1 = fake.unix_time()
unix_time_2 = fake.unix_time(start_datetime=unix_time_1)

Execute the example and get the following traceback:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "/home/…/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/faker/providers/date_time/__init__.py", line 1813, in unix_time
    start_datetime = self._parse_start_datetime(start_datetime)
  File "/home/…/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/faker/providers/date_time/__init__.py", line 1924, in _parse_start_datetime
    return cls._parse_date_time(value)
  File "/home/…/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/faker/providers/date_time/__init__.py", line 1981, in _parse_date_time
    return datetime_to_timestamp(now + timedelta(value))
OverflowError: date value out of range

Expected behavior

unix_time_2 should be a unix timestamp with a value higher than unix_time_1.

Actual behavior

Crashes with OverflowError.

[mochi-moshi]

Howdy! I was just looking into this bug and I noticed the OverflowError is caused because Provider._parse_date_time when taking an integer as a parameter treats it as a timedelta in days where as unix_time() returns the POSIX timestamp in seconds. Provider._parse_date_time's behavior is set to treat integer arguments as days in the tests, so would the preferred behavior be to accept integer date times as timestamps or keep it as days?

[fcurella]

Thank you for looking into this @mochi-moshi . I think integers as timestamps is what most people would expect, so I'd prefer that.