Al Major wrote: >>>i still think that the "real" solution requires "completing" the >>>interval types. >> >>I think thats a separate issue - you still end up with the same >>problem, just multiplied. >> > > it's only partly a separate issue. one of the sources of the problem > here is that half-open empty intervals don't makes sense. the question > "does the instant 9:00 belong to [9:00, 9:00)" has conflicting answers > (by definition). empty intervals that are either open or closed actually > do make sense. so "does the instant 9:00 belong to [9:00, 9:00]" has a > clear answer: "yes". "does the instant 9:00 belong to (9:00, 9:00)" also > has a clear answer: "no".
But the analagous question is does (08:00,10:00) contain (09:00,09:00) ? So the same non-intuitive empty-interval logic applies. > btw, i already have use cases in my code where i need a closed interval > [a, b]. i've been handling them by creating the interval [a, b + > epsilon) where epsilon is very small. this is obviously a hack, although > it works. so there's an argument to be made that they're necessary. You may be right. If you can share use cases thats always useful looking forward ;-) Stephen Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Joda-interest mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
