Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

From: Horst von Brand (vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl)
Date: Tue Jan 11 2000 - 00:00:21 EST


Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> said:

[...]

> yes it is. but the number of bits is not. On a 32 bit system "long long" is
> 64 bits. On a 64bit system it is 128. And if you need more bits that
> that you are out of luck. "long long" is imprecise, I'd prefer a construct
> like "int var: 64". This way I know exactly how many bits are available.
> If I need 128 bits for something (or even 4096) then I can define them. Or
> is there going to be a "long long long long" for 128 bits, and "long long
> long long long long .... long" to reach 4096?

COBOL gives you this (sort of) >:-}

[You could use some multiprecicion library for this, if you _really_ need
 it. Something I somehow doubt, at least I'm sure you don't need it bad
 enough for all other C users to suffer it]

-- 
Horst von Brand                             vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile                               +56 32 672616

- 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 : Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:00:17 EST