On 2009 Feb 20, at 12:21, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
Em Sex, 2009-02-20 às 10:40 -0600, Dave Rolsky escreveu:On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Daniel Ruoso wrote:If we're going to use an epoch, it should be the Operating System's epoch. Anything else will lead to confusion and disorder ;PAnd which OS epoch would that be?The one where the program is being run. The only way of being actually cross platform is to providing moresemantics to the value, choosing an arbitrary epoch that is not going tobe consistent with the epoch used in the OS is simply being annoying.
Strongly disagree: Perl6 is a high level language; it should not force me to operate at a level where the OS's version of time is visible, but should always present a higher level abstraction. I should *never* have to work with a time_t unless there is some particular reason I need it (e.g. some network protocol or binary file format demands it), then there can be an FFI call from a library to obtain it or generate a Perl6 time from it.
Quite frankly I won't miss time_t. -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
