This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 20, 2022. It is now read-only.
add implicit Successible and Predecessible for Timestamp #530
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please check for overflow here:
def next(old: Timestamp) = if (old.millisSinceEpoch != Long.MaxValue) Some(old.next) else None
and similarly below. The whole point of the Option here is to be precise.
johnynek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2014
…decessible add implicit Successible and Predecessible for Timestamp
snoble
pushed a commit
to snoble/summingbird
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2017
Add Batched[A] type for efficient lazy addition
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add implicit Successible and Predecessible for Timestamp, so the toLeftClosedRightOpen method is avaliable for Interval[Timestamp]