This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 120 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 120 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
I did a quick review of SRFI 120 and I don’t understand the use of the SRFI 18 time objects, which represent an absolute point on the time line. SRFI 18 says: “A time object represents a point on the time line. Its resolution is implementation dependent (implementations are encouraged to implement at least millisecond resolution so that precise timing is possible). Using time->seconds and seconds->time, a time object can be converted to and from a real number which corresponds to the number of seconds from a reference point on the time line. The reference point is implementation dependent and does not change for a given execution of the program (e.g. the reference point could be the time at which the program started).” Marc > On Apr 20, 2015, at 6:12 PM, cowan@xxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >> The reason why I've added the time object is that it can handle nano >> second. If users want to make smaller unit of period, then at least the >> SRFI can handle it. Or it might be better to let the integer represents >> nano second instead of milli second. Any opinion? > > I think milliseconds is fine. I just don't want an explicit dependency > on SRFI 18/19 here. So integers or implementation-defined things, > which could be SRFI 19 time objects or something else.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature