The Inbox: Chronology-Core-dtl.66.mcz

A new version of Chronology-Core was added to project The Inbox:
http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Chronology-Core-dtl.66.mcz

==================== Summary ====================

Name: Chronology-Core-dtl.66
Author: dtl
Time: 28 March 2021, 10:52:56.0001 am
UUID: 9695afba-0eaf-49ab-8d2e-177f089f1d04
Ancestors: Chronology-Core-dtl.65

Let "1 second" be a synonym for "1 seconds" so that "5 second" does not answer one second. Likewise for minute, hour, etc.

=============== Diff against Chronology-Core-dtl.65 ===============

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>day (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  day
 
+ ^ self days!
- ^ self sign days!

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>hour (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  hour
 
+ ^ self hours
- ^ self sign hours
  !

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>microSecond (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  microSecond
+ ^ self microSeconds!
- ^ self sign microSeconds!

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>milliSecond (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  milliSecond
 
+ ^ self milliSeconds
- ^ self sign milliSeconds
  !

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>minute (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  minute
 
+ ^ self minutes
- ^ self sign minutes
  !

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>nanoSecond (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  nanoSecond
 
+ ^ self nanoSeconds
- ^ self sign nanoSeconds
  !

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>second (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  second
 
+ ^ self seconds
- ^ self sign seconds
  !

Item was changed:
  ----- Method: Number>>week (in category '*chronology-core') -----
  week
 
+ ^ self weeks
- ^ self sign weeks
  !

Hi,
great!

Would it be a bad idea to have milliseconds instead (or on top) of
milliSeconds? Etc.



-----
^[^ Jaromir
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Squeak-Dev-f45488.html

On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 11:13:37AM -0500, Jaromir Matas wrote:
> Hi,
> great!
>
> Would it be a bad idea to have milliseconds instead (or on top) of
> milliSeconds? Etc.
>

I would not want to bother with that. It would just add more stuff
to the API, and the existing selector names are good enough.

Dave

Hi David,

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, David T. Lewis wrote:

I find the existing names annoying. I think the author of those
methods was not familiar with the SI system.


Levente

>
> Dave

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:10:22PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
I have no strong opinion one way or the other. It's a bit of aggrivation
to manage the deprecation process, but aside from that I guess there
is no reason not to fix the selector names. Should we do that?

Dave
 

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:10:22PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, David T. Lewis wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 11:13:37AM -0500, Jaromir Matas wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>great!
> >>
> >>Would it be a bad idea to have milliseconds instead (or on top) of
> >>milliSeconds? Etc.
> >>
> >
> >I would not want to bother with that. It would just add more stuff
> >to the API, and the existing selector names are good enough.
>
> I find the existing names annoying. I think the author of those
> methods was not familiar with the SI system.
>

I have no strong opinion one way or the other. It's a bit of aggrivation
to manage the deprecation process, but aside from that I guess there
is no reason not to fix the selector names. Should we do that?

Dave