Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 22:01:34 +0200 From: Diomidis Spinellis <dds@aueb.gr> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP! MAJOR change to FreeBSD/sparc64 Message-ID: <405B519E.4060501@aueb.gr> In-Reply-To: <p06020442bc80d40bec13@[128.113.24.47]> References: <p060204f5bc750679b827@[128.113.24.47]> <200403140716.i2E7GDKa007204@dungeon.home> <p06020404bc7abad600b6@[128.113.24.47]> <200403142317.09065.craig@xfoil.gank.org> <405AAC1A.20408@aueb.gr> <p06020442bc80d40bec13@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 10:15 AM +0200 3/19/04, Diomidis Spinellis wrote: [...] >> Another interesting possibility that the standard appears to >> allow, is to change the *precision* of time_t. For example, >> if time_t represented time in two-second intervals ... [...] > Not allowed. time_t has to be a value of "seconds". When the > standard talks about "precision", it means we might only UPDATE > that value every 10 seconds, but the value itself is in seconds. I could not find anything in my copy of C99, substantiating that. Seconds are not mentioned in any of the sections 7.23.1 defining time_t, 7.23.2.3 defining mktime, and 7.23.2.4 defining time. Section 7.23.2.4 specifically states that "the encoding of the value is unspecified", and 7.23.2.3 specifies that "mktime returns the specified calendar time encoded as a value of type time_t". POSIX is of course a different story. Diomidis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?405B519E.4060501>