On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 22:25, Mark Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> But that would also open the door to timestamps in the 1940s -- or >> indeed BC timestamps, if users want to use them! (Or from the 35th >> century.) > > Well, time=0 is still 1970-something, the epoch time doesn't change > simply because we opened up time_t to 64 bit...
True - are negative time_t values specifically disallowed, then? I mean, no journal entries on LiveJournal or Dreamwidth will have a server date before 1970 simply because the site wasn't around then, but I'm not sure why display dates before that would be disallowed. (Though (time_t)-1 might be a bit tricky to handle as it's an error code in some cases.) > (Although, maybe > there's some spec that remaps the time when you move to 64 bit, and I > don't know about it. Suppose that's possible.) Not that I know of. Though ANSI C doesn't (AFAIK) say that the epoch is 1970; that's merely the Unix convention. One could put the epoch in 1852 (IIRC) like VMS, or in the year 0, or wherever you wanted, in theory. Cheers, -- Philip Newton <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
