On 2011-05-14 16:35, Michel Fortin wrote: > On 2011-05-14 13:04:54 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu > > <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> said: > > Documentation: > > > > http://d-programming-language.org/phobos-prerelease/std_log.html > > > > Source: > > > > https://github.com/andralex/phobos > > > > Feedback welcome. > > Shouldn't "everyMs" and "afterMs" accept any of core.time's duration > types instead of being fixed in milliseconds?
I'd vote for that. Then again, I'm tempted to argue that we shouldn't have _any_ time-related functions which take naked numbers. There are several time- related functions in druntime and Phobos which still have versions which take naked numbers. They may all now have versions which take a core.time.Duration, but most of them still have versions which takes a naked number and which have not be scheduled for deprecation. Now, there may be a valid argument for keeping versions of some functions around which take a naked number instead of a Duration, but I really think that we should lean towards using Durationl for that sort of thing and get rid of those that take naked numbers. It's less error-prone and would increase the consistency of how times are handled in druntime and Phobos. - Jonathan M Davis