Re: A neutral challenge.

"Peter Koch Larsen" <pkl_at_mailme.dk> wrote in message news:61c84197.0306261140.6454f73c_at_posting.google.com...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
news:<FPrKa.542$5O7.72062052_at_mantis.golden.net>...
> [snip]
> >
> > Back to the scheduling problem you propose, what granularity of schedule
did
> > you envision? I notice all the times are even hours. Is that just
> > incidental? Or do you propose a calendar to schedule events on an hourly
> > basis?
>
> Ideally, my belief is that the granularity should be arbitrarily small
> - this will make the solution applicable for other jinds of schedules
> as well. If you do choose a specific interval this should be allowed,
> but in that case I would expect some explanation as to why this
> specific interval was chosen.
>
> For the rest of your post allow me to return later.

I don't think it makes sense to schedule rooms to the nanosecond. To the quarter-hour is probably as great a granularity as anyone would ever really use in practice and to the minute should provide a safe enough margin of over engineering.

However, I note that, if one has type generators for time types, the granularity would certainly be an important parameter. Thus one could adapt the solution to any granularity, and if the product or language supports generic programming, one could instantiate a calendar or schedule as a parameterized solution. I should point out that instantiating a schedule with nanosecond granularity would probably push physical independence beyond the limits of any tool. Received on Fri Jun 27 2003 - 01:12:22 CEST