Thomas Bushnell, BSG scripsit: > The time functions should return a NUMBER. I'm disgusted (sorry) with the > retreat from Scheme's excellent numeric system. Implementations can return > whichever format number suits them best. Let the interface declare the > accuracy of the returned value as well--as a number.
Nobody disputes that the representation of an instant of time should be a number, and a rational number at that. But instants aren't sufficient for dealing with all cases of time. Back in the middle Devonian, an instant (whether second or millisecond) is much too precise -- indeed, a day is much too precise, as we know only roughly how many days per year there were then. Less exotically, a government bond might fall due on "March 31, 2031, 5 P.M. Washington D.C. time". What instant is that? We don't know, because Congress might change the rules for Daylight Saving Time again. So there has to be a way of representing and dealing with broken-out dates and times, since those are what matter in the Real World. -- The man that wanders far [email protected] from the walking tree http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --first line of a non-existent poem by: John Cowan _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
