On Tue, 02 Jun 2015 17:03:30 +0100 "Ben Avison" <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I were to make one change to gettimei() now, looking back, it would be > to make it return int32_t instead. This is because most often you'd be > subtracting two sample outputs of the function, and it's more often > useful to consider time intervals as signed (say if you're comparing the > current time against a timeout time which may be in the past or the > future). If gettimei() returns a signed integer, then C's type promotion > rules make the result of the subtraction signed automatically. Wasn't overflow well-defined only for unsigned integers? I'm also not sure if clock_t is signed or unsigned, and so does it wrap to zero or a huge negative number. Thanks, pq _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
