On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 10:30:36PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not everyone codes so that time_t is equivalent to int so there's nothing wrong with time_t being a long (and fix the code that can't handle it).
Of course not. The synopsis for time(2) on v7 Unix says | long time(0) | | long time(tloc) | long *tloc; precisely because int was 16 bits, and therefore not long enough. Mind you, time_t wasn't even a sparkle in anybody's eyes then... -- Christopher Vance -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
