Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

From: Kai Henningsen (kaih@khms.westfalen.de)
Date: Thu Jan 06 2000 - 18:17:00 EST


khim@sch57.msk.ru (Khimenko Victor) wrote on 06.01.00 in <ABS_9TuOpO@khim.sch57.msk.ru>:

> long long is in gcc for VERY long time. It's slow but AFAIK more or less
> bug free in recent versions. Why we should wait for C standard approval ?

Because doing otherwise would break ANSI/ISO C compatibility?

In fact, ISO C0X approval is NOT ENOUGH: because breaking programs written
perfectly correct according to C9X is not an option right now. In ten
years, maybe.

Remember that those programs _do_ work right on a platform where time_t is
64 bit and one standard integer type - say, long - is 64 bits, too. Such
as most 64 bit platforms. Why break them for a 32 bit platform? There's no
urgent need.

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