Re: [PATCH] Separate clocksum format for durations >= 1 day

[Toby Cubitt <tsc25@cantab.net>]

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 10:14:27AM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Toby Cubitt <tsc25@cantab.net> writes:
> 
> > Personally, I find the time duration "123:15" much harder to parse
> > mentally than "5d 3:15".
> >
> > The attached patch adds a new customization option
> > `org-time-clocksum-days-format'. When non-nil, this is used instead of
> > `org-time-clocksum-format' for clocksum durations longer than 1 day. It
> > gets passed three values: # days, # hours, # mins. (Note that you don't
> > have to use all three in the format if, say, you don't feel the need to
> > display the minutes for such long durations.)
> >
> > In the patch, I've set the default value for this new customization
> > option to a non-nil value. If you prefer to keep the current behaviour as
> > the default, just make the default value nil.
> >
> > Toby
> >
> >
> > PS: I guess the logical extrapolation of this is to add even more
> > `org-time-clocksum-[months|years|decades]-format' options. (Or, probably
> > better, abandon printf formats for long durations and just add an
> > `org-time-clocksum-format-function' option, leaving it up users to define
> > a function to format the time as they wish.)
> >
> > I haven't done this in the patch, because I think "64d 3:15" is no harder
> > to parse than "2m 4d 3:15" (plus there's the thorny issue of how many
> > days should be in a month). And by the time you get to "535d 3:15"
> > vs. "2y 5d 3:15", the duration is so long that you probably don't care
> > much about the exact value, except that it's a very long-running task
> > indeed!
> 
> Thanks for your patch.
> 
> I like the idea, but it would be better to avoid introducing yet another
> defcustom for this. There is already:
> 
>   - org-time-clocksum-format
>   - org-time-clocksum-use-fractional
>   - org-time-clocksum-fractional-format
> 
> As you suggest, I think a better plan is to replace all of them with
> a single `org-time-clocksum-display-function'. Its expected value would
> be a function accepting 2 arguments: hours and minutes, as numbers and
> it should return a string.
> 
> We can also provide default functions for current behaviour (i.e.
> fractional time and Hs:MM) and for the one you suggest.
> 
> It's more work, but it simplifies the whole thing in the end.
> 
> What do you think? Do you want to give it a try?

Sounds like a good plan, and it won't be very difficult to implement.

I'm happy to have a go, but I'm somewhat short on spare time just at the
moment, so it might take me a few weeks to get around to it.

Best,

Toby
-- 
Dr T. S. Cubitt
Mathematics and Quantum Information group
Department of Mathematics
Complutense University
Madrid, Spain

email: tsc25@cantab.net
web:   www.dr-qubit.org