On 2024-08-23 15:26:04 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 09:02 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > Is mktime(3) allowed to return -1 and set EOVERFLOW on a successful > > call? > > > > RETURN VALUE > > The mktime() function shall return the specified time since the > > Epoch encoded as a value of type time_t. If the time since the > > Epoch cannot be represented, the function shall return the value > > (time_t)-1 and set errno to indicate the error. > > For mktime the standard only says "return (time_t)-1." It does not > mention errno at all. And the standard also says: > > The value of errno may be set to nonzero by a library function call > whether or not there is an error, provided the use of errno is not > documented in the description of the function in this document. > > > Then I think the API is completely broken. How should we check for > > errors after a mktime(3) call? > > Maybe, special case if tm contains Dec 31 1969 23:59:59 UTC... But it's > just stupid. > > > If this is so, let me file a glibc bug requesting a fix of the API, > > adding a promise that on success, errno will remain unset. > > It's a bug in the standard, not glibc. And the standard has deprecated > it anyway. > > https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n2566.pdf I can see only asctime and ctime mentioned there, not mktime. So mktime isn't deprecated, is it? -- Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
