On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Jerry Krinock <je...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> On 2011 Oct 08, at 21:12, Stephen J. Butler wrote:
>
>> What's wrong with +[NSDate distantFuture]?
>
> Nothing. It's only [NSDate -dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:FLT_MAX] which
> sometimes gives unexpected results.
It's not, at least not on 10.6 with Xcode 3.2.5. This program...
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
NSAutoreleasePool * pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSLog( @"distantFuture: %@", [NSDate distantFuture] );
NSLog( @"FLT_MAX: %@", [NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:FLT_MAX] );
[pool drain];
return 0;
}
Gives the output (in 32 and 64 bit):
2011-10-09 14:46:41.639 Untitled[60937:a0f] distantFuture: 4000-12-31
18:00:00 -0600
2011-10-09 14:46:41.640 Untitled[60937:a0f] FLT_MAX: 5828963-12-19
18:00:00 -0600
I think you'll find distantFuture much less buggy than your solution,
seeing as how it isn't going to overflow or run into boundary
situations.
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
