ADJUST-TIMESTAMP takes specifications with :SEC, :MINUTE, :HOUR etc. (why :MINUTE and not :MIN, btw?) to change data; but the getter functions are TIMESTAMP-SECOND, TIMESTAMP-MINUTE, TIMESTAMP-HOUR etc.
It would be nice to have either SETF functions with the same names (TIMESTAMP-SECOND etc.), or to have a function that uses the specifications from ADJUST-TIMESTAMP (a copy of %CONSTRUCT-TIMESTRING looks like a good candidate), to have a consistent way to access the parts of a timestamp.
The (TIMESTAMP-PART :SEC) version might be easier to use, as a single part name is sufficient for both getting and setting; the SETF TIMESTAMP-SECOND idea would again need passing two different functions on to the function.
(Yeah, I could do (FUNCALL (ENSURE-FUNCTION (list 'setf name)) new-value timestamp), but that's not so nice, is it?)
Well, one common way to get/set things would be nice.
ADJUST-TIMESTAMPtakes specifications with:SEC,:MINUTE,:HOURetc. (why:MINUTEand not:MIN, btw?) to change data; but the getter functions areTIMESTAMP-SECOND,TIMESTAMP-MINUTE,TIMESTAMP-HOURetc.It would be nice to have either
SETFfunctions with the same names (TIMESTAMP-SECONDetc.), or to have a function that uses the specifications fromADJUST-TIMESTAMP(a copy of%CONSTRUCT-TIMESTRINGlooks like a good candidate), to have a consistent way to access the parts of a timestamp.The
(TIMESTAMP-PART :SEC)version might be easier to use, as a single part name is sufficient for both getting and setting; theSETF TIMESTAMP-SECONDidea would again need passing two different functions on to the function. (Yeah, I could do(FUNCALL (ENSURE-FUNCTION (list 'setf name)) new-value timestamp), but that's not so nice, is it?)Well, one common way to get/set things would be nice.