Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:14:28 -0700 From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> To: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, msmith@mass.dis.org Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <200110270214.f9R2ESv06734@mass.dis.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG> of "Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:52:56 EDT." <20011026215256.A2283@coffee.q9media.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG> writes: > > I'll say it again, then. > > > > These programs should *not* be trying to use these functions. These functions > > are meant for manipulating time_t, which is a representation of "now". > > C99 defines clock_t and time_t as "arithmetic types capable of > representing times". I can't find any reference in POSIX or C99 that > time_t or its associated functions only deal with time as "now". > Could you please reference the source of this information. You could try to be more subtle. However, I'll say it yet again. time_t, and the seconds-from-epoch model represent system time. This is just how it works. What Matt is in a tizzy about is that he's just realised that "system time" isn't necessarily all-encompassing, and that he needs something better. The mistake that's being made is in assuming that these functions should be gratuitously changed to suit this sort of application, rather than finding and using tools more suitable to the application in the first place. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110270214.f9R2ESv06734>