On 11/28/2017 09:02 AM, jp charras wrote: > Le 28/11/2017 à 00:27, Tomasz Wlostowski a écrit : >> On 27/11/17 21:18, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: >>> On 11/27/2017 2:56 PM, jp charras wrote: >>>> Le 27/11/2017 à 20:18, Tomasz Wlostowski a écrit : >>>>> On 27/11/17 17:05, Henner Zeller wrote: >>>>>> Yes, I know about the time_t being different type situation, >>>>> >>>>> Why not just use uint64_t instead of time_t? It's identical on every >>>>> platform. >>>>> >>>>> Tom >>>>> >>>> >>>> Looks good to me. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Will this cause issues on platforms where time_t is 32 bits? >>> >> These platforms have a serious issue anyway if they'll live long enough >> to reach year 2038 ;-) >> >> IIRC the timestamp is just an unique ID of the item in Kicad, right? >> It's never propagated to the system time, so 64-bits IMHO 64-bits should >> be safe everywhere. >> >> Tom > > Yes it is a unique ID only. > It is converted to a date in footprint editor (legacy mode) to show the last > edition date to the user. > This is easy to convert a uint64_t to show this message.
I suppose the most elegant solution would be to change time_t in KiCad source code to uint64_t. This leaves no ambiguity and should be easy to handle with swig. Regards, Orson
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
