Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!mcdchg!chinet!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!gatech!rutgers!cmcl2!yale!wald-david
From: wald-david@CS.YALE.EDU (david wald)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: struct tm -> time_t converter wanted
Keywords: C library, time
Message-ID: <41735@yale-celray.yale.UUCP>
Date: 30 Oct 88 03:49:28 GMT
References: <442@grand.UUCP> <8700@smoke.BRL.MIL> <6964@cdis-1.uucp> <8716@smoke.BRL.MIL> <12418@steinmetz.ge.com> <8754@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Sender: root@yale.UUCP
Reply-To: wald-david@CS.YALE.EDU (david wald)
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept, New Haven CT  06520-2158
Lines: 14

In article <8754@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes:
>In article <12418@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>>changing the epoch or going to 64 bits would break existing programs.
>
>Neither will break existing correct programs that don't assume things
>not promised by the specifications.

As Bill said, it will break existing programs.


============================================================================
David Wald                                              wald-david@yale.UUCP
						       waldave@yalevm.bitnet
============================================================================