From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Dec 19 14:14:52 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B6BFB1;
 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:52 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B2378FC13;
 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [192.168.61.3])
 by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316E18A3FC;
 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBJEEnN9016665;
 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:49 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: API explosion (Re: [RFC/RFT] calloutng)
In-reply-to: <20121220005706.I1675@besplex.bde.org>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
References: <50CF88B9.6040004@FreeBSD.org>
 <20121218173643.GA94266@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <50D0B00D.8090002@FreeBSD.org>
 <50D0E42B.6030605@FreeBSD.org> <20121218225823.GA96962@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
 <1355873265.1198.183.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
 <14604.1355910848@critter.freebsd.dk>
 <CACYV=-Eg542iHm9KfujPvCzZrA4TqepEBVA8RzT1YOHnCgfJnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <15882.1355914308@critter.freebsd.dk> <20121219221518.E1082@besplex.bde.org>
 <16439.1355922282@critter.freebsd.dk> <20121220005706.I1675@besplex.bde.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:49 +0000
Message-ID: <16664.1355926489@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Davide Italiano <davide@FreeBSD.org>,
 Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>,
 phk@onelab2.iet.unipi.it, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>,
 "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:14:52 -0000

--------
In message <20121220005706.I1675@besplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes:
>On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

>> Except that for absolute timescales, we're running out of the 32 bits
>> integer part.
>
>Except 32 bit time_t works until 2106 if it is unsigned.

That's sort of not an option.

The real problem was that time_t was not defined as a floating
point number.

>> [1] A good addition to C would be a general multi-word integer type
>> where you could ask for any int%d_t or uint%d_t you cared for, and
>> have the compiler DTRT.  In difference from using a multiword-library,
>> this would still give these types their natural integer behaviour.
>
>That would be convenient, but bad for efficiency if it were actually
>used much.

You can say that about anything but CPU-native operations, and I doubt
it would be as inefficient as struct bintime, which does not have access
to the carry bit.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.