Front page | perl.perl6.language.datetime |
Postings from August 2000
NOTICE: reply-to set to the -language-datetime list. Ted Ashton writes: > Well then, why 1970? If we're defining our own, why buy into one > which is scheduled to blow up in 2038? Why not at the very least > start with Jan 1, 2K? This works, provided epoch seconds are stored in some form of big integers (either arbitrary precision, or 64-bit). The epoch change would then be fine by me. But epoch changes don't solve the 2038 problem, Unix already tried that before the move to 32-bit integers (they moved the epoch from 1970 to 1971, I think, when their previous size of integer was about to run out of space, then when it ran out again next year they said "yeah, ok, wrong solution" :-). NatThread Previous | Thread Next