I'm trying to understand what appears to be a limitation of tsibble. The function tsibble:::split_period is used for example by tsibble:::interval_pull.POSIXt, to handle objects of base class difftime:
In order to transform the base difftime object as a lubridate period object, split_period calls lubridate::seconds_to_period. This assumes that the difftime object will return a number in seconds once cast as a double. However that assumption seems to fail for any difftime object equal to, or longer than one minute. Is that right? If so, why not use lubridate::as.period instead of lubridate::seconds_to_period?
I'm trying to understand what appears to be a limitation of tsibble. The function
tsibble:::split_period
is used for example bytsibble:::interval_pull.POSIXt
, to handle objects of base classdifftime
:In order to transform the base difftime object as a lubridate period object,
split_period
callslubridate::seconds_to_period
. This assumes that the difftime object will return a number in seconds once cast as a double. However that assumption seems to fail for any difftime object equal to, or longer than one minute. Is that right? If so, why not uselubridate::as.period
instead oflubridate::seconds_to_period
?