- From: Phil Nitschke <Phil.Nitschke@youramigo.com>
- Date: 21 Nov 2001 18:21:00 +1030
- To: www-lib@w3.org
Hi all,
With many architectures still implementing an ms_t in a 32-bit integer,
isn't HTGetTimeInMillis() going to suffer fairly badly from arithmetic
overflow?
struct timeval tp;
gettimeofday(&tp, NULL);
return(tp.tv_sec * 1000) + (tp.tv_usec / 1000);
(This message was written about 1006328788000 milliseconds after Epoch.)
Given that, can any of the code in HTDoConnect() that calls
HTDNS_updateWeigths() be trusted?
Similarly, won't there be problems with other code that uses ms_t?
Why does the HTNet structure need a connecttime field? Isn't it asking
for trouble to have a time_t connecttime field when the HTHost structure
has a similarly named field implemented as a ms_t?
(I search the archives, but could not fund these topics being discussed
before.)
--
Phil +----------------------------------------------------------+(\
_/_) YourAmigo Pty Ltd http://www.YourAmigo.com/ |( \
_/// / _ ================= Phone Intl.: +61-8-8211-9211 _ |_) )_
(((( (| /_) mailto:Phil.Nitschke@YourAmigo.com (_\ |/ /)))
\\\\ \_/ / Address: <standard> \ \_/ ////
\ / 80 Gilbert Street, Adelaide <disclaimers> \ /
) _/ South Australia 5000 Australia <apply> \_ (
/ /----------------------------------------------------------\ \
/ / \ \
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2001 02:51:09 UTC