Re: Support for sub-second time in decoded time

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>>> `encode-time` uses a fraction-representation (NOM . DENOM), which is
>>> probably easier to manipulate.
>>
>> You mean internally?
>
> No, as yet-another format.
>
>> It doesn't seem to be mentioned in the doc string,
>> but it's an entire essay now...
>
> It's here:
>
>     If FORM is a positive integer, the time is returned as a pair of
>     integers (TICKS . FORM), where TICKS is the number of clock ticks and FORM
>     is the clock frequency in ticks per second.  (Currently the positive
>     integer should be at least 65536 if the returned value is expected to
>     be given to standard functions expecting Lisp timestamps.)  If FORM is
>     t, the time is returned as (TICKS . PHZ), where PHZ is a platform 
> dependent
>     clock frequency in ticks per second.  If FORM is ‘integer’, the time is

Hm, OK.  But I don't see how that relates to adding a new sub-second
field to the output value from `decode-time'.  :-)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no