git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Introduce timestamp_t for timestamps
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:44:40 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704211219460.3480@virtualbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpog647of.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Hi Junio,

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > Note: while the `time_t` data type exists and is meant to be used for
> > timestamps, on 32-bit Linux it is *still* 32-bit. An earlier iteration
> > used `time_t` for that reason, but it came with a few serious
> > downsides: as `time_t` can be signed (and indeed, on Windows it is an
> > int64_t), Git's expectation that 0 is the minimal value does no longer
> > hold true, introducing its own set of interesting challenges. Besides,
> > if we *can* handle far in the future timestamps (except for formatting
> > them using the system libraries), it is more consistent to do so.
> 
> I somehow had an impression that the list consensus during the
> discussion on an earlier round of this series was that time_t is
> more appropriate, as platforms with time_t with inadequent range
> will be updated before it gets too late at around 2038 (or they will
> die off).

There was this sentiment, but that would require a change in Git's source
code where it can handle unsigned *and* signed data types for timestamps,
and that was too much of a change to bring in that late in the patch
series.

Besides, supporting a signed timestamp data type is a separate issue from
trying to support dates that are insanely far in the future.

> After all, at some point we need to interact with the
> platform functions that expect time_t as their interface and they do
> not take our own timestamp_t without casting.

No, not necessarily. When we generate a .zip archive, for example, we may
never need to parse or format the timestamps. When we log with a format
that does not require the system routines to format the date (e.g. Unix
epoch). And when we do not parse nor format the timestamps to begin with,
e.g. fetching and pushing or committing.

It is *only* when we try to parse or format timestamps, *and* the system's
time_t is not large enough, that we run into trouble.

This is an improvement from before, where we would run into trouble
whenever time_t was larger than unsigned long, *or* whenever time_t is too
small for those timestamps.

Your comment, and my reaction, reminded me that I had planned to look into
all calls to date_overflow() and remove those that are now unnecessary, or
at least move them to the place where they are absolutely necessary.

> But that is provided if not introducing timestamp_t and using time_t
> results in a simpler code.  I do not know if that is the case.

As I had pointed out in my reply to Peff: removing the assumption that 0
is the minimal timestamp is something I am unwilling to tackle, it looks
way too fragile/dangerous to me to do this in the time I could allocate
for that.

> For timestamps in the distant past, even though time_t could be
> unsigned, I do not think anybody came up with a concrete example of a
> platform with such a problem during the previous discussions, while I do
> recall people wanting to use Git to store historical documents with
> timestamps before 1970.  We do expect 0 can be used as a sentinel, which
> needs to be updated once we seriously start supporting such use cases.
> I think that (i.e. should the timestamp be signed?) is more or less
> unrelated to the focus of the discussion that stemed from this topic,
> which was "ulong that is often 32-bit does not necessarily fit the
> notion of time on a platform, which is time_t, and we need to widen it",
> which all involved in the discussion agreed.

If anybody feels strongly enough about representing timestamps earlier
than the Jan 1 1970, they should feel very welcome to work on this.

My patch series would make that task slightly easier, even.

> In any case, when merged to 'pu', this had a slight conflict with
> topics in flight in builtin/name-rev.c and I think I resolved it
> correctly, but please double check.

I double-checked, there were just two conversions from `unsigned long
taggerdate` to `timestamp_t taggerdate`. I repeated the merge with my
latest iteration and resolved them the same way as you did.

Apart from the date_overflows() changes I mentioned above, I also fixed
the problems identified by Travis CI and VSTS Build.

v4 is coming,
Dscho

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-21 10:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 113+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-27 21:30 [PATCH 0/6] Use time_t Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 21:30 ` [PATCH 1/6] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit time_t Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 22:55   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-27 21:30 ` [PATCH 2/6] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 22:37   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-27 22:51     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-28 10:49       ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 21:31 ` [PATCH 3/6] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-01 18:20   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-01 19:53     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-27 21:31 ` [PATCH 4/6] Prepare for timestamps to use 64-bit signed types Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 21:31 ` [PATCH 5/6] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 21:31 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use time_t where appropriate Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-27 22:48 ` [PATCH 0/6] Use time_t Junio C Hamano
2017-02-28 11:32   ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-28 14:28 ` Jeff King
2017-02-28 15:01   ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-28 16:38   ` René Scharfe
2017-02-28 18:55     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-28 20:04       ` Jeff King
2017-02-28 20:54       ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-02-28 21:31         ` Jeff King
2017-02-28 21:31         ` René Scharfe
2017-02-28 23:10           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-03-01  0:59             ` René Scharfe
2017-02-28 17:26   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-28 20:01     ` Jeff King
2017-02-28 22:27       ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-28 22:33         ` Jeff King
2017-03-01 17:23           ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-02 19:06 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] Introduce timestamp_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 1/8] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-03  4:22     ` Torsten Bögershausen
2017-04-03 22:47       ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 2/8] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 3/8] t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 4/8] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-03  4:26     ` Torsten Bögershausen
2017-04-03 22:50       ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 5/8] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:06   ` [PATCH v2 6/8] Introduce a new data type " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:07   ` [PATCH v2 7/8] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-02 19:07   ` [PATCH v2 8/8] Use uintmax_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:52   ` [PATCH v3 0/8] Introduce timestamp_t " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:52     ` [PATCH v3 1/8] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:52     ` [PATCH v3 2/8] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:58     ` [PATCH v3 3/8] t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:58     ` [PATCH v3 4/8] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:58     ` [PATCH v3 5/8] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:58     ` [PATCH v3 6/8] Introduce a new data type " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:58     ` [PATCH v3 7/8] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-20 20:59     ` [PATCH v3 8/8] Use uintmax_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21  6:05     ` [PATCH v3 0/8] Introduce timestamp_t " Junio C Hamano
2017-04-21 10:44       ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2017-04-21 10:45     ` [PATCH v4 0/9] " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 1/9] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 2/9] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 3/9] t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 4/9] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24  3:19         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 5/9] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 6/9] Introduce a new data type " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-21 10:45       ` [PATCH v4 7/9] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24  3:16         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-24 13:57           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-25  2:37             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-25  3:56             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-21 10:46       ` [PATCH v4 8/9] Use uintmax_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24  3:24         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-24 10:28           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-25  3:59             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-25 20:10               ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26  1:52                 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-26  3:45                   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-26  9:32                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 13:18                     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-21 10:46       ` [PATCH v4 9/9] show_date_ident(): defer date overflow check Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24  3:29       ` [PATCH v4 0/9] Introduce timestamp_t for timestamps Junio C Hamano
2017-04-24  6:15         ` Jacob Keller
2017-04-24 14:02           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 11:37         ` Jeff King
2017-04-25 20:13           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 14:00         ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:57       ` [PATCH v5 0/8] " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:57         ` [PATCH v5 1/8] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:57         ` [PATCH v5 2/8] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 3/8] t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 4/8] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-25  5:59           ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 5/8] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 6/8] Introduce a new data type " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 16:43           ` Johannes Sixt
2017-04-26 19:18             ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 22:32           ` René Scharfe
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 7/8] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-24 13:58         ` [PATCH v5 8/8] Use uintmax_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 16:36           ` Johannes Sixt
2017-04-26 19:09             ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-25 21:54         ` [PATCH v5 0/8] Introduce timestamp_t " René Scharfe
2017-04-25 22:22           ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 22:09             ` René Scharfe
2017-04-26  1:56           ` Junio C Hamano
2017-04-26 19:20         ` [PATCH v6 " Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:26           ` [PATCH v6 1/8] ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:26           ` [PATCH v6 2/8] t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:26           ` [PATCH v6 3/8] t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:26           ` [PATCH v6 4/8] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:29           ` [PATCH v6 5/8] Introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:29           ` [PATCH v6 6/8] Introduce a new data type " Johannes Schindelin
2017-05-20  5:47             ` [PATCH] name-rev: change a "long" variable to timestamp_t Junio C Hamano
2017-05-22 13:39               ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:29           ` [PATCH v6 7/8] Abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps Johannes Schindelin
2017-04-26 19:29           ` [PATCH v6 8/8] Use uintmax_t for timestamps Johannes Schindelin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.20.1704211219460.3480@virtualbox \
    --to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=tboegi@web.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).