(SC22WG14.6131) (SC22WG14.6130) Summary of problems with draft C9x <time.h>, and a proposed fix

[Douglas A. Gwyn (IST)]

I think we need to poll the voting members to determine whether
anybody insists on having struct tmx in C9x.  If not, since there
has been some formal objection to it, backing out the struct tmx
related changes seems like an appropriate way to respond to
(adverse) public comment.

Personally I'd rather see a completely satisfactory technical
solution than layering on a still-not-satisfactory solution.
Since I doubt the former can be done within the C9x schedule,
leaving <time.h> pretty much the way it was in C89 seems proper.