On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:38:23PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote: > Well then, why 1970? If we're defining our own, why buy into one which is > scheduled to blow up in 2038? Why not at the very least start with Jan 1, 2K? Um, it's not guaranteed to blow up in 2038. That's an implementation detail. IF we implement our time values as 64-bit integers (for instance), we'll long out-live the 2038 deadline. -Scott -- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl platform... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Buddha Buck
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl ... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL ... Buddha Buck
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL ... Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl platform... Ted Ashton
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl ... Stephen P. Potter
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL ... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl platform... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl ... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... skud
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl plat... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 99 (v2) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX... skud