On Dec 27, 2006, at 14:32, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

It's impossible to accurately represent a millisecond using binary
fractions. That would be unacceptable for most sub-second use.

Reality check: with a 32bit fraction, the error would be 69 ps.

...which accumulates in arithmetic and causes equality comparisons to
fail. This should hold:

   1000 * 1ms == 1s

It won't if you use a binary fraction.

A better idea might have been to use Haskell's "Rational" type for
the seconds offset, which is stored as two integers (for numerator
and denominator). Instead I used a fixed-point type (internally just
an integer from 0 to 86400999999999999). It does not separate
"integer" and "decimal" part.

Yes, let us make it as expensive as possible to operate on timestamps,
so that everybody will have to invent their own faster type.

NOT!

I'm not seeing the problem here: you can represent an integer in the
range 0 to 86400999999999999 with a 64-bit type. There's nothing
faster than integer arithmetic.

--
Ashley Yakeley

Reply via email to