From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Nov 14 16:54:38 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 956A216A4CE; Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:54:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 80DB343F3F; Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:54:36 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from gamplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3p2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25698;
	Sat, 15 Nov 2003 11:54:34 +1100
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 11:54:33 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org
To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031114194119.GA94198@madman.celabo.org>
Message-ID: <20031115114906.L11453@gamplex.bde.org>
References: <20031114194119.GA94198@madman.celabo.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: __TIME_MIN/__TIME_MAX
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:54:38 -0000

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:

> In at least one place in libc, it is necessary to range check a time_t
> value.  One most platforms, time_t has the same range as `int', but
> on at least amd64, it has a larger range.  Any objections to adding
> definitions of __TIME_MIN and __TIME_MAX to sys/${arch}/_limits.h?
>
> I could just do the usual check for lossage after casting, except that
> in theory time_t could be a floating-point value (but not in reality
> in FreeBSD).  It seems cleaner to me to have an explicit range.

I prefer the cast.  It doesn't require nonstandard infrastructure that
would need to be maintained forever, and works even better for floating
point too (assuming a C99 compiler, but not in reality in FreeBSD :)
(min/max checks don't work right for floating point because precision
may be just as important as range).

Bruce