Subject: RE: SDL-News: time conversion
From: Thomas Weigert (thomas.weigert#motorola.com)
Date: Sat Dec 16 2000 - 19:13:28 GMT
Become an SDL Forum Society member <http://www.sdl-forum.org/Society/members.htm>
The originator of this message is responsible for its content.
-----From "Thomas Weigert" <thomas.weigert#motorola.com> to sdlnews -----
I understand the value of type checking. However, it is not clear to me how
much value type checking adds in this particular case---it seems reasonable
to add two Reals (one representing a time, the other a duration) to obtain a
new time. In practice these are Integers or Reals anyway (in the code
generator) and usually one interacts with external functions when it comes
to time (either stored in PDUs, or part of calls to middle ware). So one
usually ends up doing conversions between time or duration as represented
externally as Integers or Reals, and time and duration as represented in
SDL. Seems that this may be situation where the type checking is more often
in the way than it helps?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-meeting#sdl-forum.org [mailto:owner-meeting#sdl-forum.org]On
> > Is there any good reason for not using reals to set SDL timers?
> Yes, there is.
> Because Time is a separate type, any value that is used to set a
> TIMER must
> be a Time value. The general principle of strong type checking
> applies. The
--End text from "Thomas Weigert" <thomas.weigert#motorola.com> to sdlnews ---
For extra SDL Forum Society benefits join at <http://www.sdl-forum.org/Society/members.htm>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Thu May 09 2013 - 16:05:49 GMT