Re: [PATCH] Add timegm POSIX call
Joel Sherrill <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.newlib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAF9ehCVXKWho=Jnms4hPpYz9mjDBb2wYLGLY_o+FTCXCO2xM+Q@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:42 AM, Corinna Vinschen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 13 18:17, Andrew Russell via newlib wrote: > > >From e182faa79c35984b667029ef7b6e4a8ce7329897 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Andrew Russell <[email protected]> > > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 12:14:18 -0700 > > Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Start of mktime.c copy to timegm.c > > > > I am proposing to add the timegm POSIX call to > > Newlib. Part of this refactors some of the code in libc/time/local.h and > > libc/time/mktime.c, per this discussion: > > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2018/msg00186.html > > I'm looking for comments from other (non-Cygwin) devs here. > From my perspective, I don't mind having common methods that are not in libc or POSIX in newlib or RTEMS. Ultimately, the wider set of methods makes packages easier to port. I would ask that the method is documented using the newlib markup and that its historical origin is noted. The Linux man page is clearly discouraging: CONFORMING TO These functions are nonstandard GNU extensions that are also present on the BSDs. Avoid their use; see NOTES. But overall, improving cross-platform compatibility is good even when it means adding extensions that have no impact when not used. --joel > > Thanks, > Corinna > > -- > Corinna Vinschen > Cygwin Maintainer > Red Hat >