Marc Feeley scripsit:

> The problem with an integer representation of time is that a scaling
> factor has to be chosen by the *writer of the spec*.  This is a much
> too early binding time.  Different applications will have different
> resolution needs.  You propose milliseconds, but my application needs
> microseconds and the next guy needs nanoseconds.  Even if you decide to
> chose nanoseconds for the spec to cover all possible needs, somewhere
> someday an application will need picoseconds, so they won't be able
> to use your time API.

Concedo.  I have switched to having current-posix-second return an
inexact rational number representing seconds since the epoch, but
disregarding leap seconds.  This entailed renaming the ms-of-day field
to second-of-day, and removing the ms-of-second field altogether.

--
Even the best of friends cannot                 John Cowan
attend each others' funeral.                    cowan@ccil.org
        --Kehlog Albran, The Profit             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports