[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#645594: This is not a bug, it's a feature!

> According to Alexis, the original reporter, flite actually used to say
> "exactly" only for 0, but I can't find a trace of that, Alexis?

Not quite; I said that, by examining the code, it looked as if there
had been (at some earlier time) a different method of working out if
rhe word "exactly" should be used.  But from bodrato's explanation
regarding seconds, I see that I was interpolating the history of the
code's development incorrectly. Sorry for any confusion.

So I change my bug report from a bug report to a change request.

It seems to me that bodrato's argument for not changing the code
depends on whether one thinks that seconds are important or not. If
seconds are important then maybe flite should be telling us what they
are! And if seconds are not important then the code should be changed
so that 4 minutes past is not 5 minutes past.

> is?  That behavior would mean that it is "exactly" half past four during
> two whole minutes, is that expected?

Of course, when one has *developed* the code then its behaviour seems
logical and intuitive, but to the average *user* "exactly 5 past"
at 4 minutes past cannot be expected or logical or intuitive.

If bodrato still thinks then code should not be changed, then please
feel free to close my bug report; it's not a big issue, and in all
other respects I'm very impressed with flite. Thanks.


Reply to: