On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Kirrily Robert wrote:
>
> The confusion between Date/Time stems from the overlap space... so why
> not just say that "anything that deals with units of a day or greater
> goes in Date, anything that NEVER deals with days or greater goes in
> Time" ... and define "deals with" as "accepts parameters, or returns
> values, which represent those units" (the black box approach -- doesn't
> matter what the module does internally).
I agree, but with some fine-tuning: Time modules that accept "1D" as a
synonym for 86400 seconds should IMHO still go under Time::, even though
they "deal with units of a day".
I think the idea is clear, I just can't come up with a waterproof way of
specifying the split. "Modules that deal with units greater than a day,
or do not deal with units less than a day, belong in Date::"???
> Hence a module with a method which accepted seconds-since-epoch and
> returned a Frobnitzian calendar day would go into Date. On the other
> hand, a module which accepted seconds-since-Unix-epoch and returned
> seconds-since-VMS-epoch would go into Time.
Sounds just about right to me.
--
Ilmari Karonen - http://www.sci.fi/~iltzu/
"Wheel-reinventing is naturally a pain in numerous places, but since our
existing wheels are hexagonal and the new ones we're making are round,
it's well worth it." -- Dan Birchall in the monastery
