George> So while I started typing this thinking it was a straight
George> choice between Peter's monotonicity/invertibility and the
George> fact that my system corresponds better to natural usage,
George> Peter doesn't even have monotonicity or invertibility.
Yes, I also realized that after I left my office.
Sorry for the confusion.
...
Now, isn't that a good argument for just *defining* the length of
a year and a month in terms of seconds and then go with it. It
naturally gives you all nice properties and you cannot argue if and
when you want to overflow or underflow or whatever?
-Peter
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
