From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Nov 16 05:00:59 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D976516A4CE
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:00:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C5DF43FCB
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:00:58 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nectar@celabo.org)
Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (verified OK))
	by gw.celabo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 26652548A4; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:00:58 -0600 (CST)
Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id C1AF06D455; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:00:57 -0600 (CST)
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:00:57 -0600
From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>,
	Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Message-ID: <20031116130057.GA56160@madman.celabo.org>
Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>,
	Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>,
	Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
References: <20031114194119.GA94198@madman.celabo.org>
	<3FB6AA8F.37ED6D50@mindspring.com> <20031116102010.GA53282@madman.celabo.org>
	<20031116111212.GA55844@madman.celabo.org>
	<20031116231838.X1400@gamplex.bde.org>
	<20031116125230.GA56115@madman.celabo.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20031116125230.GA56115@madman.celabo.org>
X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1
Subject: Re: __TIME_MIN/__TIME_MAX
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 13:01:00 -0000

On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 06:52:30AM -0600, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 11:36:41PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Actually, it's implementation-defined if time_t is integral (doesn't
> > matter if it is signed or unsigned) (and the value is not representable).
> > It's only undefined if time_t is a floating type.
> 
> Are you certain?  I'll have to double-check.  I thought that if a type
> was signed, then attempting to assign an out-of-range value was
> undefined (similar to overflow with signed types).

I should know better than to question whether you are certain :-)
I think I have failed to differentiate between `implementation-defined'
and `undefined'.

I'd like to avoid both `implementation-defined' and `undefined'
behavior.

Cheers,
-- 
Jacques Vidrine   NTT/Verio SME      FreeBSD UNIX       Heimdal
nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se