Inner rounding TimeSegments about biz HOT 7 CLOSED

Could you provide specific examples with expected output?

At first glance, I'm not sure if this is something that needs to or should live in the gem itself.

from biz.

It might be too specific.
It could be nice if TimeSegment had some kind of interval API :

• intersection (overlapping).
• union (it might be tricky for none overlapping segments).
• contains (an other segment).
  Le 3 avr. 2016 21:13, "Craig Little" [email protected] a écrit :

Could you provide specific examples with expected output?

At first glance, I'm not sure if this is something that needs to or should
live in the gem itself.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#54 (comment)

from biz.

Two out of the three already exist on TimeSegment. The only one that doesn't is the tricky union.

Does that address your use case?

from biz.

The contains? seems to take a Time and not a TimeSegment.

2016-04-05 2:39 GMT+02:00 Craig Little [email protected]:

Two out of the three already exist on TimeSegment

biz/lib/biz/time_segment.rb

Lines 34 to 43 in e05502f

	def contains?(time)
	(start_time..end_time).cover?(time)
	end
	def &(other)
	lower_bound = [self, other].map(&:start_time).max
	upper_bound = [self, other].map(&:end_time).min
	self.class.new(lower_bound, [lower_bound, upper_bound].max)
	end

.
The only one that doesn't is the tricky union.

Does that address your use case?

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#54 (comment)

Thomas Pocreau
Recherche & Développement | Colisweb

[email protected]
06 45 12 61 58
Euratechnologies | 165, Avenue de Bretagne
59000 - Lille

from biz.

How about doing something like:

ts1.endpoints.all? { |endpoint| ts2.contains?(endpoint) }

from biz.

Yes, I did it this way but contains? is error prone since it returns false
when you pass a TimeSegment.

Thanks a lot for your feedback :-)
Le 5 avr. 2016 09:49, "Craig Little" [email protected] a écrit :

How about doing something like:

ts1.endpoints.all? { |endpoint| ts2.contains?(endpoint) }

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#54 (comment)

from biz.

No problem! Yeah, unfortunately, that's sort of the nature of weakly typed languages like Ruby. Without adding a bunch of type checks everywhere, one must understand what the method expects to receive. At least it didn't return true every time, eh? :)

I'll definitely keep this use case in mind in case I hear similar needs from other users, but I'm going to close the issue for now. Thanks for putting the gem through its paces! Please let me know if you run into anything else.

from biz.