fix RFCs/411: add std/cputicks

[timotheecour]

fix nim-lang/RFCs#411
(split off from #18149 to just focus on adding std/cputicks)

[timotheecour]

PTAL

[Varriount]

Please only open these PRs once actual discussion has occurred on their RFCs - otherwise it creates unnecessary noise for reviewers and risks fracturing discussion. A link to the implementation can be given in the RFC.

I would also recommend using "implements" or "resolves" rather than "fixes" for PRs like this. "fixes" implies that a PR solves an objective problem, such as a logic bug, rather than a subjective problem.

[timotheecour]

Please only open these PRs once actual discussion has occurred on their RFCs - otherwise it creates unnecessary noise for reviewers and risks fracturing discussion.

I disagree. An RFC becomes much more concrete with a link to a PR that implements it, which users can try and break. This is how you refine ideas and identify problems, otherwise it just remains a vague idea. You can comment on the RFC for the general design/idea, and on the PR for the particulars of the implementation. A link

A link to the implementation can be given in the RFC.

which is what this PR is, allowing inline comments etc

I would also recommend using "implements" or "resolves" rather than "fixes" for PRs like this. "fixes" implies that a PR solves an objective problem, such as a logic bug, rather than a subjective problem.

potato, potato. implements doesn't work with github issue cross-linking.

[arnetheduck]

"draft PR":s exists for this reason

[arnetheduck]

or they can sit in a fork repo, and have equally good integration with github while still reducing noise

[Araq]

This should start its life as a Nimble package. Also: Supporting this at compile-time from the get go is not nice, not everybody enjoys the possibility of a build depending on CPU ticks.