-------- In message <20121220005706.i1...@besplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes: >On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> Except that for absolute timescales, we're running out of the 32 bits >> integer part. > >Except 32 bit time_t works until 2106 if it is unsigned. That's sort of not an option. The real problem was that time_t was not defined as a floating point number. >> [1] A good addition to C would be a general multi-word integer type >> where you could ask for any int%d_t or uint%d_t you cared for, and >> have the compiler DTRT. In difference from using a multiword-library, >> this would still give these types their natural integer behaviour. > >That would be convenient, but bad for efficiency if it were actually >used much. You can say that about anything but CPU-native operations, and I doubt it would be as inefficient as struct bintime, which does not have access to the carry bit. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
