From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Aug 13 21:26:10 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA16639 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 21:26:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pobox.com (dantooine-1-115.mdm.mke.execpc.com [169.207.137.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA16633 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 1998 21:26:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hamilton@pobox.com) Message-Id: <199808140426.VAA16633@hub.freebsd.org> Received: (qmail 3776 invoked from network); 13 Aug 1998 23:19:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (HELO pobox.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Aug 1998 23:19:51 -0500 To: Ivan Brawley cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64-bit time_t In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 14 Aug 1998 10:10:02 +0930." <199808140040.KAA14156@mad.ct> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 23:19:51 -0500 From: Jon Hamilton Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <199808140040.KAA14156@mad.ct>, Ivan Brawley wrote: } The one named Mike Smith wrote: } } > How soon will FreeBSD move to a 64-bit time_t? The article at } } > } } > http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/14390.html } } Read the article: } } } } Certainly by 2038, Unix 'time_t' will be 64 bits or more, } } assuming Unix survives in some form," said Dennis Ritchie, } } co-author of the Unix operating system. } } } } If you have nothing else to worry about for the next 40 years, I'm sure } } we can find you something more useful to do. 8) } } Question: What is wrong with using an unsigned long for time_t, instead of } long (which is then assumed signed). You can't represent dates prior to the epoch, for starters. Some people don't care about this, some do. -- Jon Hamilton hamilton@pobox.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message