Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:48:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <15322.15516.770431.53945@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <20011027015133.E4539380A@overcee.netplex.com.au> References: <200110270137.f9R1bVv06321@mass.dis.org> <20011027015133.E4539380A@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm writes: > > I doubt i386 32 bit apps will be around in 20 years. If it lives on, it > will be something like x86-64 or intel's spin on that. It too will have 64 > bit "long" and we can use a 64 bit time_t there. > > I dont see sufficient reason to inflict this pain on i386 in the name of > having the same size time_t. Having the same type (long) - yes, but using a > quad_t is just expensive overkill. > > I wish I hadn't even brought up the possibility of changing i386. I didn't > make it clear enough how much I hated the idea of it. If the alpha moves, I'd like to see i386 move too, just to ensure that it is done right & and alpha isn't left twisting in the wind... Drew 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?15322.15516.770431.53945>