From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B9C9C6FD1D for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 19:06:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229839AbjCUTGr (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:06:47 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33646 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229645AbjCUTGq (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:06:46 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4100A1BD for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 12:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id d14so4531326ion.9 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 12:06:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; t=1679425602; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Xyt5oISv72/5x2b5mSsYu23uBvClRepXUNVOCSfjueM=; b=LYK43KlpRRcBBkcHCjcDa/0pqzDhTTSADsBXVEeu92uVidmZ+YXS/nrbfDSjpJIZ5D cx86FgkannJelxjYoa0of7STLwaMM/UVR9BHQ47xZjqlgDTC/umMs5FG1d/blmz6uNHC LfugmbhvW2gSAJHM2pTPWP9+9+KX+14zZZSD/EsrYAMd39IyIOQ3O96CLeIBAHaPhxND 2pjJKp+tZuq2G4DIvqJojPf8hFCzxgqPYLzllufL6ZzLlRpyQYb+NZIFJXwofFbsU6lb Dx2ARQTUe9mXd0x/eux4NHcvGVkE2yxwdqQJx7vs/tSgn5VWIXaakEYMx+lTtLUFWB3s 9Q8g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679425602; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Xyt5oISv72/5x2b5mSsYu23uBvClRepXUNVOCSfjueM=; b=uynTTERWc41/ys9HJkZZGt4t9i0hdIwna8A9f3IDDUNUd7Y2lyCALO/ubADM6IZOra 3uDGXZmU6Uyx2kgG5J79NCEEj3coFj+7S75lBrkqWp+9f5nzMdnDa1hRCjla2sDDyw0y 9V0ENGaB7gCyWItPsTQ2mTrHqn9xflgUEsKFaptSyD6RfxU/qaRgVsdp5lTYRkMlb14d t76TOW98HD5jW0h1qP9rZJbgtx8vzCVE1oOeFxe2klLZYmlNM9BOr1x1UVikJ89S3FaY 5u53h1MNY+EtlY0qVkmQjnFw2d6FIjfJpP2Msv3Eq0M1lA9cDjB0FNeGp5sT1M8IFuaK SJAA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWSsU54ON+hBWRiJohAL9V0TGOat8cRS94cQIJe5LhsORZrKEMM tqQyIoMzAZO01IO6Gitw5ZO25Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+uJDnSY/5xdRXU3fxExxU11CRyYosnhNyipA8872yLFZ7RCHASxBQzgFxh4I4mM60S7Li+Ww== X-Received: by 2002:a5e:d914:0:b0:74c:8b1c:239c with SMTP id n20-20020a5ed914000000b0074c8b1c239cmr2349730iop.10.1679425602482; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 12:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v13-20020a02b08d000000b004063fa63e31sm4070895jah.118.2023.03.21.12.06.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 12:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 15:06:40 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Jeff King Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Paul Eggert , Eric Wong Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] git-compat-util: use gettimeofday(2) for time(2) Message-ID: References: <20230319064353.686226-1-eggert@cs.ucla.edu> <20230320230507.3932018-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20230321182252.GJ3119834@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230321182252.GJ3119834@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 02:22:52PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > The disadvantage is that it's longer to type, and that you have to > declare a timeval in the caller. So maybe it's a dumb idea. I don't think it's a dumb idea per-se, but I think that being able to pass `time(NULL)` around without having to create a timeval and pass a pointer to *it* before then giving that timeval to some other function is a nice advantage. So, yeah, we probably should just avoid calling time() altogether, but in practice I like the solution of redefining time() to do the right thing and implement it by calling gettimeofday(). ...Which is a long way of saying that I agree with you that this approach looks good, and that I'd like to avoid putting time() in the list of banned functions. Thanks, Taylor