[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: encode-time vs decode-time
|
From: |
Lars Ingebrigtsen |
|
Subject: |
Re: encode-time vs decode-time |
|
Date: |
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:37:03 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Andy Moreton <address@hidden> writes:
> It seems that the naming of these functions is unhelpful. They should
> clearly distinguish between timestamps (absolute time/date) and
> durations (relative intervals) and be named as such.
Both encoded time and decoded time are what you call "absolute
time/date"; just represented differently. (The "second" representation
uses 1970 as the starting point.)
In addition, a number of seconds can also be used as a duration, but
that's a different matter.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
- Support for sub-second time in decoded time, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2019/07/29
- encode-time vs decode-time, Stefan Monnier, 2019/07/29
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2019/07/30
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Andy Moreton, 2019/07/30
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time,
Lars Ingebrigtsen <=
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Paul Eggert, 2019/07/30
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Paul Eggert, 2019/07/30
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2019/07/31
- Re: encode-time vs decode-time, Stefan Monnier, 2019/07/31
Re: Support for sub-second time in decoded time, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/07/29
Re: Support for sub-second time in decoded time, Paul Eggert, 2019/07/29