Re: uptime 2 years!

--- On Thu, 10/9/08, Eitan Adler <eitanadlerlist@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Eitan Adler <eitanadlerlist@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: uptime 2 years!
To: freebsd-questions@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008, 8:41 PM
Lowell Gilbert wrote:
[snip]
And in theory it should be possible to change time_t
to unsigned, and
get another two-thirds of a century out of it...

However this would break binary compatibility with anything
compiled
before the change.

One thing to consider is that changing any signed value to an unsigned value then prevents functions which return that type from returning -1 (or otherwise <0) to indicate an error condition. Even if it doesn't affect anything at all in the base system, it could impact untold sums of software developed not in the base system.
- mdh




_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: uptime 2 years!
    ... Subject: uptime 2 years! ... Lowell Gilbert wrote: ... However this would break binary compatibility with anything ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: uptime 2 years!
    ... Lowell Gilbert wrote: ... get another two-thirds of a century out of it... ... However this would break binary compatibility with anything compiled before the change. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Question about (Optional)? header files.
    ... mdh wrote: ... snip ... ... Compiling the program using both the .c and .h (with appropriate ... the method of promulgating the prototype of a function to ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Warning meaning.
    ... mdh wrote: ... snip ... ... Thanks ...never seen it that way...but it is quite elegant. ... Since it never deals with numbers greater than 1, it avoids all ...
    (comp.lang.c)