On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:52:38 +0100 Jacob Carlborg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2013-01-24 00:16, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > > I'll certainly grant that, insofar as the written order is backwards > > from the execution order. I think the "ago" is that part that bugs > > me the most. It's too clever. I could live with "2.days", but I'd > > prefer "days(2)" since that looks like a type constructor, and > > "days" isn't a property of 2. Maybe "2.toDays()", but at that point > > I'd still rather just do the simpler "days(2)". > > If you don't have "ago" how would you determine the differences > compared to the opposite, now - blah vs. now + blah > which looks like this in Ruby on Rails: > > time = 2.days.from_now > > "2" is the duration, "days" is the unit and ago/from_now indicates if > it's positive or negative. >
