From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-25 14:06:08
> A suggestion: figure out the maximum resolution any (actual, not
> theoretical) current system will need. Then assume Moore's law has quite a
> bit of life left. Adjust accordingly. If that means nano-seconds, fine,
> but it is obvious in 15-years that pico-seconds will be needed, make
> allowances now.
There should be no issue with the interface expanding to pico-seconds if that is
ever needed. I have my doubts that this will ever be needed, however.
> >Some things you DON'T need:
> >* ability to represent time points prior to 1970
>
> OK, I guess. Another question to ask yourself is how far do you want a
> filesystem (or less likely, a thread) to last? In other words, when does
Agree that they have radically different spanning ranges. It might be that the
two libraries should use different time systems b/c of this.
> roll-over occur going forward? I'd assume a couple of hundred years on the
> theory a file might really last 50 years, but you should then add a big
> fudge factor to stifle endless arguments about what the exact number should
> be.
The date representation in the file can span several thousand years into the
future. All my current implementations of time use this....
Jeff