Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps

Johannes Schindelin writes: > The code would also be incorrect, as the `minutes` variable can be > negative, which the `unsigned_add_overflows()` macro cannot handle (it > would report very, very false positives, and it would hurt you more than > me because I live

Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps

Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Junio, > > On Sun, 23 Apr 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > diff --git a/date.c b/date.c >> > index 92ab31aa441..75f6335cd09 100644 >> > --- a/date.c >> > +++ b/date.c >>

Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps

Hi Junio, On Sun, 23 Apr 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > diff --git a/date.c b/date.c > > index 92ab31aa441..75f6335cd09 100644 > > --- a/date.c > > +++ b/date.c > > @@ -46,7 +46,10 @@ static time_t gm_time_t(timestamp_t time, int tz)

Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps

Johannes Schindelin writes: > We are about to switch to a new data type for time stamps that is > definitely not smaller or equal, but larger or equal to time_t. > > So before using the system functions to process or format timestamps, > let's make extra certain that

[PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps

We are about to switch to a new data type for time stamps that is definitely not smaller or equal, but larger or equal to time_t. So before using the system functions to process or format timestamps, let's make extra certain that they can handle what we feed them. Signed-off-by: Johannes