Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

From: Kai Henningsen (kaih@khms.westfalen.de)
Date: Thu Jan 06 2000 - 18:12:00 EST


dominik.kubla@uni-mainz.de (Dominik Kubla) wrote on 06.01.00 in <20000106081019.E11495@uni-mainz.de>:

> On Thu, Jan 06, 2000 at 05:17:55PM +1030, Glen Turner wrote:
> >
> > > > ANSI/ISO C defines time_t as a signed arithmetic type, so
> > > > such a change would break correct code.
> > >
> > > Are you positive?
> >
> > I checked and you are right. ANSI C just requires that it
> > be an arithmetic type [7.12.1] (and by other rules in the
> > document, a *standard* arithmetic type).
> >
>
> Quoting POSIX Programmers Guide, 1st Ed., page 133:
>
> The type time_t is defined in <time.h>. While it is typically an unsigned
> long, it can be a double or long double.
>
>
> Looks as if POSIX and ANSI are (again) at odds...

Huh? How do you get that? Looks perfectly compatible to me.

You *do* know that you can do arithmetic with floats, do you?

MfG Kai

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST