3 ms·

I don't understand the author's effort on solving this "problem"... I wonder if he considered at some point make a contribution to stable open-source existing l

I don't understand the author's effort on solving this "problem"... I wonder if he considered at some point make a contribution to stable open-source existing libraries like arrow that even claim inspiration on one of his projects for the API. What's not for humans on the arrow API? what are the arguments for basically start yet another time library from scratch?, why is making a contribution not an option? probably the author of arrow will love your contributions and will love to hear the arguments on the changes you propose.

scrollaway 10y ago
As rich as it is to tell Kenneth to "consider contributing to existing open source libraries", I have to agree: what's so exceptional about this library when Arrow is already a thing? http://crsmithdev.com/arrow/ http://crsmithdev.com/arrow/
detaro 10y ago
> what are the arguments for basically start yet another time library from scratch? It's not exactly a time library from scratch, if you look at the amount of existing libraries it imports and the small code size (which is a good thing!). Why should he not offer a differently flavored API on top of existing parts? My impression is that most of these libs start with a strong idea what the API should be like, so large changes there are unlikely to happen.