A few more issues: 1. Should time() return an implementation defined time representation or should it return elapsed seconds since midnight January 1 1970 GMT? If it does not return elapsed seconds, should the name "time" (or the type name "time_t") be changed (so as to noisily break existing code, rather than quietly breaking existing code?) Should the names of other functions that deal with time_t values be changed? 2. If elements are added to the tm structure, should it be renamed? 3. Even if elements aren't added to the tm structure, should it be renamed? (As Guy Harris has pointed out, the standard does not define the order in which the structure's elements appear and does not preclude adding structure elements. So the "new" tm structure might be different on different machines, whereas "old" tm structures where the same on different machines. This represents a change in the tm structure's nature, and so may warrant a change of name to avoid quietly breaking existing code.) 4. Drop mktime from standard because of lack of existing art? -- UUCP: ..seismo!elsie!ado ARPA: elsie!ado@seismo.ARPA Elsie and Ado are trademarks of Borden, Inc. and Ampex.
participants (1)
-
Arthur David Olson