Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Charles Lane
Chaim Frenkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "AD" == Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AD In my humble opinion, I think perl's time() ought to just call the C AD library's time() function and not waste time mucking with the return AD value. Instead, if the time is to be stored externally for

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Charles Lane
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Charles Lane wrote: On at least some non-Unix systems, the time() function is itself an attempt to emulate Posix functionality...note that I say "attempt". And also note Do you mean that the following program might not print '5'

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Chris Nandor
At 11:01 -0400 2000.09.14, Andy Dougherty wrote: On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Chris Nandor wrote: There's also the possibility of time accepting an argument, where 0 would be perl's time and 1 would be native time, or something. Now that's a clever idea. Hmm. I think I like it as a solution to the

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Chris Nandor
At 11:15 -0400 2000.09.14, Charles Lane wrote: I've been in the Epoch !=0 mode and it sucked. I vote for Epoch=0 as the default. Well, Perl is about making things easy. What is the most common case, needing an arbitrary value of time that may or may not be used to transfer between platforms,

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Andy Dougherty
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Chris Nandor wrote: Well, Perl is about making things easy. What is the most common case, needing an arbitrary value of time that may or may not be used to transfer between platforms, or needing a value of time that is specific to a given platform? And I cannot

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Chaim Frenkel
"CN" == Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CN No, that won't really work. When my offset from GMT changes for daylight CN savings time, it will break. The point of having a module is that epoch CN conversions are more complicated than that. For example, Mac OS epoch CN begins at Jan 1

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now, on those platforms without 64 bit support, a double float has a lot more mantissa bits than 32, typically 50-something (on a total of 64 bits). This means that all integers with up to more than 50 significant bits can exactly be represented. That

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Chris Nandor
At 17:47 -0400 2000.09.14, Chaim Frenkel wrote: "CN" == Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CN No, that won't really work. When my offset from GMT changes for daylight CN savings time, it will break. The point of having a module is that epoch CN conversions are more complicated than that.

Re: RFC 99 (v3) Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch

2000-09-14 Thread Chaim Frenkel
"CN" == Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is a wider problem then a fixed epoch for perl. Let's turn this around. What if we are on a platform that doesn't use perl's epoch and we need to write a value to a file? CN Yes. What if? That's what we're addressing. Right now, you