[phobos] next release

[Sean Kelly]

On Sep 9, 2010, at 5:25 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> 
> Just so you know, I fully expect that the datetime code that I've been working 
> on will be done in less than a month. It'll be at least a week (probably closer 
> to two), but it certainly won't be in the range of a month. Now, how many 
> changes will be required after it's reviewed, or whether it will be accepted at 
> all, is another matter. But it shouldn't be all that much longer before I'm 
> done.

There are a bunch of routines in druntime that could really use a structured timespan representation (Boost actually even uses a full SystemTime class for most of these) and I'm trying to work out the best way to do this.  In Tango, the decision was to have the routines all accept a long value that is the same resolution as the tick count from TimeSpan, which is why everything currently works as it does.  I've always hated this and would love to do something more structured, but complications arise from possible redundancy or incompatibility with std.time.  What I've done for now is duplicate Boost's time_duration struct (as TimeDuration) into core.time, and I'm looking at using this for Thread.sleep(), etc.  Thoughts?