Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 11:43:37 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de> Cc: Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mktime(3) and strange struct tm entries Message-ID: <20000107114337.A17459@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20000107173623.B4381@cichlids.cichlids.com>; from "Alexander Langer" on Fri Jan 7 17:36:23 GMT 2000 References: <19991231171423.A4219@cichlids.cichlids.com> <200001071628.LAA76267@lakes.dignus.com> <20000107173623.B4381@cichlids.cichlids.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Jan 07), Alexander Langer said:
> Thus spake Thomas David Rivers (rivers@dignus.com):
>
> > I believe this is correct behaviour.
>
> Ok. I got a further question:
> >From ctime(3):
> til tm_mon and tm_year are determined. Mktime() returns the
> specified calendar time; if the calendar time cannot be
> represented, it returns -1;
>
> Which calendar time is meant?
> IMO November 31th is void and cannot be represented.
The manpage also states:
The original values of the tm_wday and tm_yday components of the
structure are ignored, and the original values of the other
components are not restricted to their normal ranges.
...
On successful completion, the values of the tm_wday and tm_yday
components of the structure are set appropriately, and the other
components are set to represent the specified calendar time, but
with their values forced to their normal ranges.
Nov 31 cannot be represented, but it gets normalized to Dec 1. The
only non-representable dates are those that cannot be stored in a
time_t.
--
Dan Nelson
dnelson@emsphone.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000107114337.A17459>