> On the one hand, I agree.  "HiRes" is bad, and "hires" is a bit worse.
> OTOH, _so_ many people are already familiar with Time::HiRes, that having
> our own variation on it may be confusing to as many people, or more, as
> "hires" is.

So are we back to DT::HiRes?  Or just rename the constructor?  I would like to see 
this functionality make it into the next release.

-J

--

Reply via email to