M. Warner Losh said:
> time_t is so totally broken, it isn't funny. That's the closest thing
> to a standardized API there is for time. All others are stuff folks
> have done here or there, but they aren't universal enough to be
> considered.
>
> Too bad the problems with time_t are well known, well discussed and
> well enumerated. Or rather I should say "too bad POSIX doesn't care
> enough to change it" since the cost of changing time_t is huge...
Not so.
POSIX in the past deferred to WG14 (the ISO C committee) because that's
where time_t came from.
WG14 is willing in principle to make changes to time_t, up to and including
completely replacing it by something else. *BUT* it needs a complete and
consistent proposal and, preferably, experience with it.
Any proposal has got to deal with a whole load of issues, many of which
haven't been properly documented. For example, it should be possible to add
and subtract times and intervals (e.g. "what time is 14 months and 87 days
from now?").
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive_at_demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert | Home: <clive_at_davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
THUS plc | |
Received on Wed Dec 27 2006 - 01:25:06 PST