On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:07:59 -0400, David Abrahams wrote > "Jeff Garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:00:42 -0400, David Abrahams wrote > >> The "fractional seconds" concept is undocumented. My guess it's > >> something like: > >> > >> x.fractional_seconds() == x.ticks() % seconds(1).ticks() > >> > > Uh-huh. So is my formula above correct or not?
Sorry, yes I believe so. > > To really use fractional_seconds you call the resolution traits by > > calling: > > > > time_duration::rep_type::res_adjust() > > Where is *that* documented? It isn't, that's the problem. > ...code deleted... > I'm sorry, that's really nasty. Why wouldn't I just do > > seconds(1).ticks() > > ?? Never thought of it, nice trick :-) > OK, well I do. I'm porting some Java code which uses times in whole > milliseconds, and when a time gets written to disk I need to write > the number of milliseconds to maintain a compatible format. Ok. And I assume that you want to use it as a duration within the program? Makes sense. > > But now that I think about it would seems like it might > > be possible to provide the inverse interface... > > Yeah, easy even. Care to share what you are thinking? > >> BTW, why plural hours, minutes, seconds, but singular millisec, > >> microsec, nanosec? > > > > Yikes! They probably all should be plural. Problem is the abbreviated > > 'millisecs' doesn't sound right to me, so perhaps that's the reason.... > > Well, abbrevs just don't sound right. Bite the bullet and use the > full names, please! I've added full length names to CVS (milliseconds, nanoseconds, microseconds). I'll deprecate the old names over a release or so. Jeff _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
