Article Review: Migrating from std.date to std.datetime

[Jonathan M Davis]

On 2011-05-15 05:26, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
> Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On 2011-05-15 03:34, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
> >> Thanks a lot for writing the article. I was just about to get rid of
> >> std.date and migrate to std.datetime, so it's perfect timing. ;-)
> >> 
> >> A few nitpicks:
> >> 
> >> - a short motivation for using hecto-nano-seconds would be nice, it's
> >> not really the most obvious choice.
> > 
> > It's the highest precision that you can have and still have a decent
> > range of values in a 64-bit integer. Going by 10 ns units would result
> > in the range being too small, but 100 ns gives you from around 29,000
> > B.C. to 29,000 A.D. It's also what C# uses.
> 
> Thanks for the clarification (I know it's also the resolution from the
> Windows API). I suggest to put it somewhere in the article or the
> documentation.
> 
> >> - there is an alias for std.string.indexOf in std.datetime, that causes
> >> ambiguities when imported with other modules. (AFAICT it is used to
> >> disambiguate std.algorithm.indexOf and std.string.indexOf, which are bad
> >> by themselves, but it'd be better to use explicite std.string.indexOf in
> >> the few places in std.datetime).
> > 
> > That's a bug. I shouldn't have done that. I didn't think about the alias
> > being public when I did it. It has now been fixed on github.
> 
> Unfortunately, for some obscure reason, private module declarations are
> still placed into the overload set, so your fix does not help.
> You should either alias it to something unlikely to clash with something
> else or use fully qualified names (though this does not allow UFCS).
> 
> >> - the documentation for std.datetime.WindowsTimeZone is missing on the
> >> website
> > 
> > I don't know why it would be. It's probably a bug relating to the new
> > StdDdoc versioning that we switched to (instead of using D_Ddoc which
> > screwed up people who build the documentation at the same time as their
> > code - a bad practice IMHO, but we decided to not set it up so that it
> > didn't work when using Phobos). As WindowsTimeZone is only on Windows,
> > it definitely had to be versioned with StdDdoc.
> 
> I just noticed that it shows up on
> http://www.d-programming-language.org/phobos/std_datetime.html,
> but not on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/phobos/std_datetime.html
> 
> >> - the documentation for std.file.getTimesWin/Posix is not found on the
> >> website (why the different function names?)
> > 
> > Probably a StdDdoc problem as well.
> 
> also on d-programming-lanuage.org.

Well, Walter obviously isn't using the d-programming-language.org makefile to 
generate the documentation for www.digitalmars.com, since the style is 
completely different. I would guess that he didn't adjust what he was doing to 
use -version=StdDdoc.

- Jonathan M Davis