Re: Temporal and purity (was: Re: IO, Trees, and Time/Date)

2009-02-20 Thread Mark J. Reed
Dates starting at midnight is fine, but I agree that a Date shouldn't automatically coerce into midnight on that date. If it's going to autocoerce at all, I'd recommend noon instead, but better to force the programmer to pick what they mean. On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:32 AM, David Green

Temporal and purity (was: Re: IO, Trees, and Time/Date)

2009-02-19 Thread Timothy S. Nelson
Just to clear up ahead of time, the consensus both here and on IRC seemed to be that in the core, we put a basic Temporal::Instant object that about powerful enough to deal with: - localtime/gmtime functionality - ctime, mtime, etc, in stat() - nanoseconds or whatever needed

Re: Temporal and purity (was: Re: IO, Trees, and Time/Date)

2009-02-19 Thread Martin Kealey
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Martin D Kealey wrote: Rather, let's have immutable time values, and methods which return other values where various computations (*1) have been applied. Provide constructors which take the Y/M/D/h/m/s/dst_now/dst_rule

Re: Temporal and purity (was: Re: IO, Trees, and Time/Date)

2009-02-19 Thread David Green
On 2009-Feb-19, at 4:39 pm, Martin Kealey wrote: 2. Date isa Instant works sensibly: anywhere that expects an Instant, you can give it a Date. (Assuming we all agree that dates start at midnight, but then we *are* talking specifically Gregorian dates.) I don't like dates just starting at