On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 09:36:52 -0800, enh wrote: > it's quite possible that this could use _conv_num64(), but it wasn't > obvious to me that that function's correct? (i haven't thought too hard > about the overflow logic, but just the fact that result is an `int` seems > odd?)
It just returns a boolean value, 1 for OK, 0 for not OK. There is a result parameter for the output value. The code is effectively the same as _conv_num. I dislike that it uses int64_t instead of time_t though. - todd