lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date07 Jan 2000 01:17:00 +0200
From(Kai Henningsen)
SubjectRe: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?
khim@sch57.msk.ru (Khimenko Victor)  wrote on 06.01.00 in <ABS_9TuOpO@khim.sch57.msk.ru>:

> long long is in gcc for VERY long time. It's slow but AFAIK more or less
> bug free in recent versions. Why we should wait for C standard approval ?

Because doing otherwise would break ANSI/ISO C compatibility?

In fact, ISO C0X approval is NOT ENOUGH: because breaking programs written  
perfectly correct according to C9X is not an option right now. In ten  
years, maybe.

Remember that those programs _do_ work right on a platform where time_t is  
64 bit and one standard integer type - say, long - is 64 bits, too. Such  
as most 64 bit platforms. Why break them for a 32 bit platform? There's no  
urgent need.

MfG Kai

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2008