>
> Ok, sure. I can't really see anything wrong with your argument. That
said,
> I still don't want to change this lightly. While this would make life
> easier for users, they are already used to the library. If I get rid of it
> and then want/need it back it won't be nice. So I'll put this on
John -
Sorry to be slow on this reply...
John Torjo wrote:
> > > [1]
> > > unary operator-(time_iterator).
> > > Example: -hours(24) instead of hours(-24).
> > > (seems more straightforward)
> >
> > I see your point, but then don't you have to add all the other
> > operators for consistency? Not
Hi Jeff,
>
> > Told you I'd come back for more ;)
> > Here are some more improvements I would consider useful:
> >
> > [1]
> > unary operator-(time_iterator).
> > Example: -hours(24) instead of hours(-24).
> > (seems more straightforward)
>
> I see your point, but then don't you have to add all the
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:50:36 +0300, John Torjo wrote
> Told you I'd come back for more ;)
> Here are some more improvements I would consider useful:
>
> [1]
> unary operator-(time_iterator).
> Example: -hours(24) instead of hours(-24).
> (seems more straightforward)
I see your point, but then don
