Re: Anybody involved with ISO C standardization ?

On 2005-01-21 13:13, Chuck Swiger <cswiger_at_mac.com> wrote:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> I just read another brain-dead proposal for a new timeformat which
>> appearantly is in the ISO C queue and I would really like if we can
>> avoid having another damn mistake in that area.
>> (http://david.tribble.com/text/c0xlongtime.html)
>
> I tried to figure out what was wrong with the proposal, and came up
> with this:
>
> "The longtime_t type represents a system time as an integral number
> of ticks elaped since the beginning of the long time epoch. Each
> tick is two nanoseconds in length. The epoch begins at {AD
> 2001-01-01 00:00:00.000 Z}.

I don't like the name very much either.  Are we also going to have
longlongtime_t when 128-bit computers are more common?

- Giorgos