Some platforms have ulong that is smaller than time_t, and our
historical use of ulong for timestamp would mean they cannot
represent some timestamp that the platform allows. Invent a
separate and dedicated timestamp_t (so that we can distingiuish
timestamps and a vanilla ulongs, which along is already a good
move), and then declare uintmax_t is the type to be used as the
timestamp_t.
* js/larger-timestamps:
archive-tar: fix a sparse 'constant too large' warning
use uintmax_t for timestamps
date.c: abort if the system time cannot handle one of our timestamps
timestamp_t: a new data type for timestamps
PRItime: introduce a new "printf format" for timestamps
parse_timestamp(): specify explicitly where we parse timestamps
t0006 & t5000: skip "far in the future" test when time_t is too limited
t0006 & t5000: prepare for 64-bit timestamps
ref-filter: avoid using `unsigned long` for catch-all data type
Git's source code assumes that unsigned long is at least as precise as
time_t. Which is incorrect, and causes a lot of problems, in particular
where unsigned long is only 32-bit (notably on Windows, even in 64-bit
versions).
So let's just use a more appropriate data type instead. In preparation
for this, we introduce the new `timestamp_t` data type.
By necessity, this is a very, very large patch, as it has to replace all
timestamps' data type in one go.
As we will use a data type that is not necessarily identical to `time_t`,
we need to be very careful to use `time_t` whenever we interact with the
system functions, and `timestamp_t` everywhere else.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The manual parsing code is replaced with a call to refs_resolve_ref_unsafe().
The manual parsing code must die because only refs/files-backend.c
should do that.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, Git's source code treats all timestamps as if they were
unsigned longs. Therefore, it is okay to write "%lu" when printing them.
There is a substantial problem with that, though: at least on Windows,
time_t is *larger* than unsigned long, and hence we will want to switch
away from the ill-specified `unsigned long` data type.
So let's introduce the pseudo format "PRItime" (currently simply being
defined to "lu") to make it easier to change the data type used for
timestamps.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
