Neil Van Dyke scripsit: > There are also important decisions to make, like the semantics of > mixed-precision arithmetic on, say, time points.
Can you clarify this? > A few years ago, I spent person-weeks implementing most of ISO 8601, and > the API that I arrived at was necessarily (I felt) not nearly as neat > and tidy as TimeAdvancedCowan. I have another proposal in the works for periods, intervals, and recurring intervals, but I consider them less complicated. Note also that date objects are broader than ISO 8601: they can contain values that don't constitute time points, such as '((month . 4) (day-of-month . 2)). XML Schema notates this as "--4-2", but I don't know why. Can we have a pointer to docs for your implementation? In standards work, API buccaneering is a good thing. Note: I have just added date->alist to get the fields out of a date object in bulk. > However, the experience has led me to believe that RnRS should make > a conscious, informed decision of how much of ISO 8601 to support, > even though the answer might be "only what Java does". I looked at the official Java support, and it was a horrible mess, so I worked from Joda Time instead. It's overly complicated and Javaesque, so I tried to boil it down as much as seemed feasible. -- Kill Gorgun! Kill orc-folk! John Cowan No other words please Wild Men. [email protected] Drive away bad air and darkness http://www.ccil.org/~cowan with bright iron! --Ghan-buri-Ghan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
