Ruby on Rails had those years ago!

nice one

(int sleepTime = 1.Seconds();

while (condition)

{

   Thread.Sleep(sleepTime*=2);

   if(sleepTime>10.Minutes())

   {

       //give up

       return;

   }

}

DoWork();).DontLike();

No no. Wait.

You'll wait 17 minutes until giving up.

You'll wait 1 second, then another 2, then another 4, after 9 iterations, you'll wait 8.5 minutes. After the 10th - you've waited 17 minutes.

Ariel - I don't care that you don't care about the algorithm. I'm adding interesting content to your blog.

Thinking about the trivial algorithm and finding out that it has a bug - is more interesting than the extension method.

SCMM - You'll be the first to know about it - and get a free life-time license.

Pingback from  Dew Drop – December 27, 2009 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew

The only thing I don't know if I like is that it relies on the fact that many of the methods that will be consuming the return from these extensions are geared towards milliseconds.  If you have a method that takes a timeout in seconds instead of milliseconds, you could inadvertently introduce a bug.

Perhaps (though long winded as it may be) something like:

10.MinutesToMs()

To avoid confusion?

or 10.Minutes(Time.Milliseconds)

I know they're a bit longer, but would reduce any ambiguity.

Aother thing you could do off integer would be to create an extension to in effect power a foreach loop:

10.Times(() => { Console.WriteLine("Hello"); });