The TimeOfDay package is sweet thanks.

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 10:28:34 AM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
>
> There was talk of adding a Time type to the standard library to complement 
> DateTime and Date.
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Tom Breloff <t...@breloff.com 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> I use a type TimeOfDay which is decoupled from the actual date 
>> mechanics.  It's simply a wrapper around nanoseconds since midnight.  
>> Timezones and other date considerations are only applicable if you're 
>> crossing a date boundary or when converting to/from the type.  It's not a 
>> registered package, but feel free to check out: 
>> https://github.com/tbreloff/CTechCommon.jl/blob/master/src/time.jl
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Yichao Yu <yyc...@gmail.com 
>> <javascript:>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 9:17 AM, J Luis <jmf...@gmail.com <javascript:>> 
>>> wrote:
>>> > OK, now I'm puzzled (0.4 on Win 64)
>>> >
>>> > julia> 2^60
>>> > 1152921504606846976
>>> >
>>> > julia> 2^62
>>> > 4611686018427387904
>>> >
>>> > julia> 2^63
>>> > -9223372036854775808
>>> >
>>> > julia> 2^64
>>> > 0
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> This is integer overflow.
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > sexta-feira, 29 de Abril de 2016 às 14:03:52 UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski
>>> > escreveu:
>>> >>
>>> >> I'll answer with a pair of questions:
>>> >>
>>> >> what range of dates can you represent using a 64-bit integer to 
>>> nanosecond
>>> >> precision?
>>> >> what range of dates can you represent using a 64-bit integer to
>>> >> millisecond precision?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Ben Southwood <bensou...@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Are there any packages that can handle "Unix style" times?  How come
>>> >>> Julia can only handle seconds in 0.4.5 and milliseconds in 0.5 
>>> (unstable)?
>>> >>> Shouldn't we just aim big and go all the way to nanos?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> For example, it would be great if I could handle the following times.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2015-12-11 09:46:40.882362Z
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2015-09-11 14:37:12.960014+01:00,
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to