I think it's a bad idea to extend the SRFI modules with new functions. Would it make sense to move functionality from SRFI-19 into `racket/date' and then add the new functions there (and maybe change the SRFI-19 implementation to re-export part of `racket/date')?
At Tue, 3 May 2011 14:48:42 -0700, John Clements wrote: > It was driving me crazy that srfi-19 had no way to convert seconds to times, > especially given the fact that it appears that the internal representation > used > by srfi 19's time-utc was the result of (current-seconds).... so I added > seconds->time-utc and time-utc->seconds, along with test cases. > > Unfortunately, I have no obvious way of documenting them. Let me know if > there's a way I should be documenting this, or if it's a bad idea to extend > the > interface like this. > > John Clements _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
