[command based] add Measure<Time> overload of WaitCommand

[spacey-sooty]

Resolves #6382

[WispySparks]

Hi really cool that you took my issue, do you think there could be an overload added to the Commands.java class so that the static factory methods can be used with this?

[Starlight220]

If already, I think having the factory is more important than the constructor overload.

[spacey-sooty]

/format

[spacey-sooty]

/format

[Alextopher]

Command::withTimeout should also receive an overload.

[spacey-sooty]

/format

[PeterJohnson]

Is a static wait(Measure) overload going to be potentially confusing, as Java Object.wait(long) exists? That's the major reason why it's waitSeconds() instead of wait().

[Starlight220]

Dammit Java. It'll be less confusing than the possible wait(double). Object.wait being non-static where the other functions are static should also help here, as it won't be in the same scope (though with static import that could change).

I'm not sure. Dammit Java.

[spacey-sooty]

Idk if I should rename this but right now there is no wait(double) it's waitSeconds(double) purely because my lsp only renamed the overload...

[Starlight220]

What me and Peter are saying is that waitSeconds was not named wait to avoid confusion with Object.wait(long) (which is very much not what our users are looking for), and we're apprehensive about the naming of wait(Time) for the same reason.

The parameter type here makes me a bit less worried (double vs long can also confuse compiler method resolution, whereas Time vs long won't) -- though users looking for the non-unit overload of wait(Time) might look for a wait and not waitSeconds, so idk.

There's also the distinction that the void-returning Object.wait(long) won't fit in the relevant call sites needing a Command to be returned.

[Alextopher]

waitTime(t) seems like a good replacement name.