In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Dillon w
rites:
>
>:> struct timeval64 {
>:> time64_t tv_sec;
>:> int64_t tv_frac; /* N/2^63 fractional */
>:> };
>:
>:We have this one already, and it's called bintime, except that it
>:correctly uses N/2^64 fractional the way binary computers prefer it.
>:
>:--
>:Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>
> Hmm. That's certainly a reasonable point. I suppose a negative
> representation is still possible if one considers the entire 128
> bit word as a 128 bit fractional time.
>
> All right, I'll amend the proposal to use 2^64. the fractional
> element will be unsigned, the tv_sec will remain signed.
That is exactly how bintime is defined :-)
struct bintime {
time_t sec;
uint64_t frac;
};
If I had a int128_t, I would have used that instead...
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
