Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038

From	Bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c, comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038
Date	2022-11-12 15:56 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<tkofn4$1oac$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <tknieo$36gkg$2@newsreader4.netcologne.de> <tknjnl$k9o$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tknsj2$15ad4$2@dont-email.me> <tknui8$kmo$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tko1mv$15ij4$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/11/2022 11:57, David Brown wrote:
> On 12/11/2022 12:03, Bart wrote:
>> On 12/11/2022 10:29, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 12/11/2022 08:58, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 11/12/2022 1:36 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>> xkcd: Y2K and 2038
>>>>>>      https://xkcd.com/2697/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It shouldn't cost more than a trillion dollars or two to 
>>>>>> investigate this.
>>>>>
>>>>> The switchover to 64-bit systems should have done this.  Not sure
>>>>> that this cost a trillion dollars, but computers usually have a
>>>>> limited lifetime, so they had to be replaced anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Most software is still 32 bit.  Having the operating system as 64 
>>>> bit helps but it does not solve the problem of the 32 bit software 
>>>> running on it.  An unsigned 32 bit integer only gets us to 2106.
>>>>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
>>>>
>>>> Porting software to 64 bit is a tremendous work for most software.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Most *nix software has been 64-bit clean for decades.  Most /new/ 
>>> Windows software is 64-bit clean.  A fair bit of modern software on 
>>> Windows is cross-platform, sometimes originating in the *nix world, 
>>> and that will be fine with 64-bit.
>>
>> The size of C 'int' on the Windows and Linux systems I have 
>> encountered still seems to be stuck on 32 bits.
>>
>> Which means people lazily using that instead of `int64_t` etc, or 
>> using is as a "don't care" type, are continuing to perpetuate 
>> 32-bit-dominated software.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with using 32-bit types.

I think there is. You would question code, running on a PC where 'int' 
was i32, that specifically used int16_t everywhere for parameters, 
return types, and individual global and local variables for no 
particular reason.

Since it's not really going to save space.

Outside of C, I would only use an i32 type for the same reason I might 
choose i16 or i8: to optimise storage and layout for arrays and structs, 
or as the target of a pointer into such a structure.

Otherwise there is little point on a 64-bit system where registers and 
stack slots are 64 bits anyway. Especially as a 32-bit int is 4 billion 
times more likely to overflow.

Thread

xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 14:29 -0600
  Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2022-11-12 07:36 +0000
    Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 01:58 -0600
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2022-11-12 08:30 +0000
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-11-12 10:00 +0000
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-12 11:29 +0100
        Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-12 11:03 +0000
          Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-12 12:57 +0100
            Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-12 15:56 +0000
        Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-12 10:05 -0800
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-12 16:05 +0000
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 18:00 -0800
        Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2022-11-13 09:49 -0800
          Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2022-11-14 09:14 +0000
        Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-14 10:09 +0100
          Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2022-11-14 14:09 +0000
        Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Klaus Wacker <klaus.w.wacker@t-online.de> - 2022-11-14 13:47 +0000
    Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-11-12 16:13 +0200
      Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-12 15:49 -0700
    Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-12 15:47 -0700
  Re: xkcd: Y2K and 2038 Klaus Wacker <klaus.w.wacker@t-online.de> - 2022-11-13 12:45 +0000

csiph-web