From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: encode-time vs decode-time Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 13:46:17 -0700 Message-ID: <87v9uvmsfa.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> References: <502b23f8-58ed-38ff-ae50-fae391129a10@cs.ucla.edu> <87v9viuivo.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <83blx2cr2o.fsf@gnu.org> <8336iecfvr.fsf@gnu.org> <68d24d6a-d427-baef-27e9-ea1cbbd64c18@cs.ucla.edu> <87sgqd9plt.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <89271843-6d47-8315-ed9a-540657298985@cs.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="113471"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 17 22:46:58 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5bF-000TNN-Jl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 22:46:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37908 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5bE-0000ia-Er for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:46:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34584) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5am-0000iS-KB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:46:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5al-0007Wy-5r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:46:28 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:49570) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5ak-0007W3-VJ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:46:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [50.225.213.182] (helo=sandy) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hz5ae-0003Xi-Ej; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 22:46:23 +0200 In-Reply-To: <89271843-6d47-8315-ed9a-540657298985@cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:07 -0700") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 80.91.231.51 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:239420 Archived-At: Paul Eggert writes: > The POSIX tradition is to call these timestamps "broken-down time", > and that is what glibc calls them too. How about if we use that name > instead? It would help to be more consistent with other GNU code. "Broken-down time" sounds OK to me, although there may be some confusion: Some may assume that it's a faulty time or something. And when we get to the accessor names, it perhaps gets even more potentially confusing: (broken-down-seconds time) (broken-down-zone time) Hm... Perhaps not ideal? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no