Re: Exposing subsecond precision in current-seconds

[felix . winkelmann]

> The trouble with procedure names of the form `current-*seconds` is that
> it's not clear whether they return an integer or a float. And in the
> case of a float, which subdivision of time is represented by the integer
> part.
>
> E.g. does `current-microseconds` return an integer number of
> microseconds, or does it return a float whose integer part is full
> seconds and the fractional part is partial seconds sourced from a
> roughly microsecond-precision timer? Same concern with
> `current-milliseconds` and `current-nanoseconds`.

I think it's straightforward: "current-*seconds" always returns an
integral value, which is both intuitive and efficient. No need to deal
with flonum fuckery more than necessary.


felix