From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Jun 4 11:51:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from orthanc.ab.ca (orthanc.ab.ca [207.167.3.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B67C37B401; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 11:51:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca) Received: from orthanc.ab.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by orthanc.ab.ca (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f54IpR533116; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:51:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca) Message-Id: <200106041851.f54IpR533116@orthanc.ab.ca> From: Lyndon Nerenberg Organization: The Frobozz Magic Homing Pigeon Company To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Matt Dillon , David Wolfskill , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: time_t definition is worng In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 02 Jun 2001 12:47:32 PDT." <20010602124732.F31257@dragon.nuxi.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 12:51:27 -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>>>> "David" == David O'Brien writes: David> time_t is 32-bits without David> question. Upon what do you base that assertion? The return value from time() is long because returning an int on a 16 bit machine wouldn't make sense. I don't think you can extend that out to say that making it long meant making it exactly 32 bits. The intent was to use a type at least as big as an int, but preferably larger, which is the exact definition of a long. Maximizing the size of time()'s return value gave the greatest useful range of times, and I see no reason to change that now. (I don't see anything in the Seventh Edition manual to indicate that time() should return exactly-32-bit values.) --lyndon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message