Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:19:28 -0700 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, tlambert2@mindspring.com, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <20011026121928.D58218@nexus.root.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110261245540.11653-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>; from julian@elischer.org on Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 12:49:59PM -0700 References: <20011026100039.C58218@nexus.root.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110261245540.11653-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Any solution that tries to bandaid the problem by using a few bits from >> here or there is unacceptable to me. I have mixed feelings about changing >> to phk's 1/1^64 fractional timestamp idea, but I do think that we should >> make time_t 64 bits on all architectures, including x86, starting with v5 >> of FreeBSD. > >that would be 1/2^64 no? Yes, of course. I originally tried to write it as 1/1<<64, but then thought that sounded convoluted and then promptly screwed it up when I wrote it as a power of two. Anyway, you knew what I meant! :-) -DG David Greenman Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org President, TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011026121928.D58218>