On 5/16/19 4:55 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Thursday, 16 May 2019 at 15:52:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Hecto-nano-second, the smallest representable unit of time in SysTime
and Duration.
The output shouldn't involve the inner workings of the type. It should
be changed to say 10 ns.
If the output is meant for the developer, then I disagree subjectively,
as that creates the impression that the lowest resolution or
representable unit of time is the nanosecond.
It is what it is. The reason hnsecs is used instead of nsecs is because
it gives a time range of 20,000 years instead of 2,000 years.
We do have a nanosecond resolution, and it's just rounded down to the
nearest 10.
For example:
auto d = 15.nsecs;
assert(d == 10.nsecs);
You shouldn't be relying on what a string says to know what the tick
resolution is.
For example, if I do writefln("%f", 1.0), I get 1.000000. That doesn't
mean I should assume floating point precision only goes down to 1/1_000_000.
hnsecs is more confusing than nanoseconds. People know what a nanosecond
is, a hecto-nano-second is not as familiar a term.
If the output is meant for the user, then hectonanoseconds or
nanoseconds are going to be almost always irrelevant. The duration
should be formatted appropriately to the use case.
Depends on the user and the application.
-Steve
