[tz] RFC 8536bis

[Paul Eggert]

On 2/2/24 08:10, Michael H Deckers wrote:

> There is a decisive difference: zic(8) explicitly says that
> 
> ..zic rounds times to the nearest integer second (breaking ties to
> the even integer),...
> 
> while I have not found an indication in zic(8) when the "400 year
> hack" applies.

I was thinking of this part of zic(8):

   -v   Be more verbose, and complain about the following situations:
        ...
        The output file does not contain all the information about the
        long-term future of a timezone, because the future cannot be
        summarized as an extended POSIX TZ string.


> I would not use a C compiler that successfully
> compiles a translation unit containing
> 
> int A[ SIZE_MAX ] ;

They're not quite the same situation.

Still, that's a valid point. Perhaps zic should not try to compile 
unrepresentable Zone entries like these (i.e., go back to something like 
its behavior in tzcode 2014a and earlier), and we should remove any 
suggestion in the 'antarctica' comments that zic can compile the 
commented-out lines.