Date: 27 Oct 2001 00:47:25 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <xzp4romrpc2.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <200110262229.SAA07928@marlborough.cnchost.com> References: <200110262229.SAA07928@marlborough.cnchost.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> writes: > > The problem is that people tend to think of time as integers > > instead of a floating point value. > Precisely! So what I am suggesting is to count in the > smallest unit that makes sense on a machine. Associate the > number of zoptoseconds (or whatever) per tick and add that to > your 96 bit kernel time. You are all morons. It is painfully obvious we cannot make do with anything less than flobbosecond resolution, or we will seriously lose when we transition to 7-dimensional computation lattices and find that quadron fluctuations in the quantum phase-shift matrix is affecting make(1)s ability to correctly determine whether Richard Stallman is, in fact, Jesus reincarnate. Are we done with the bikeshed yet? Let's have those 64-bit time_ts now, please, and a coffee to go. Black, please, with two lumps. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org 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?xzp4romrpc2.fsf>