List of issues

Arthur David Olson ado
Wed Mar 18 15:43:26 UTC 1987

> > Should time() return an implementation defined time
> > representation or should it return elapsed seconds
> > since midnight January 1 1970 GMT?

> The current POSIX draft already states that it returns the latter; do
> we want to change this?

No. . .I want to make sure it stays that way.

> X3J11 also has "time" and "time_t", although since they're not
> defining an OS standard they do not require "time_t" to be an
> integral type representing seconds since the epoch.

Ideally, I'd like to see both X3J11 and POSIX define time_t as elapsed seconds
since midnight January 1 1970 GMT, and see them both define the time function
as returning such a value.  If this isn't possible, I'd like to see X3J11
define *differently-named* types and functions--tempus_t and tempus, or

My fear is that there are programs out there that "know" what a time_t is
that "know" what the "time" function returns, and that will break if things
are changed.
	UUCP: ..seismo!elsie!ado	      ARPA: elsie!ado at seismo.ARPA
	     Elsie and Ado are trademarks of Borden, Inc. and Ampex.

More information about the tz mailing list