[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?
    Hannu Savolainen wrote:
    > Another approach is making time_t to be 32 bit unsigned int which gives
    > about 70 more years.

    ANSI/ISO C defines time_t as a signed arithmetic type, so
    such a change would break correct code.

    Note that the use of types not listed in the standard
    as the base type for time_t will also break correct code.
    This includes _long _long.

    Personally, I'd wait for the new ISO C's "long long" type
    and use that as the base type of time_t. This would be 64
    bits on a 32 bit architecture. wrote:
    > Why the heck can't we just fix the issue now?

    Fixing the problem now requires increasing the size of "long"
    where it is currently 32 bits. This probably isn't a good idea.

    Glen Turner Network Engineer
    (08) 8303 3936 Australian Academic and Research Network
    Earth is a single point of failure

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.018 / U:6.908 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site