-------- In message <20121220005706.I1675_at_besplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes: >On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> Except that for absolute timescales, we're running out of the 32 bits >> integer part. > >Except 32 bit time_t works until 2106 if it is unsigned. That's sort of not an option. The real problem was that time_t was not defined as a floating point number. >> [1] A good addition to C would be a general multi-word integer type >> where you could ask for any int%d_t or uint%d_t you cared for, and >> have the compiler DTRT. In difference from using a multiword-library, >> this would still give these types their natural integer behaviour. > >That would be convenient, but bad for efficiency if it were actually >used much. You can say that about anything but CPU-native operations, and I doubt it would be as inefficient as struct bintime, which does not have access to the carry bit. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk_at_FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.Received on Wed Dec 19 2012 - 13:14:52 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:33 UTC