On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
On Jun 12, 2012, at 5:51 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com>
wrote:
Do we all agree that standardizing on the Unix Epoch is the way to go?
No :)
Why?
If it ain't broke don't fix it. We recently agreed that the Squeak epoch was well-defined, i.e. the start of the 20th century in GMT. This is clear if you read the SMalltalk-80 V2 sources. The reason advanced for changing to Unix was that the Squeak epoch is not well-defined. That argument is incorrect. Further, the Squeak epoch is embedded in the VMs, in their answering both seconds and microseconds from the epoch. So there's work involved in getting rid of it. As far as I can see changing it is pointless wasted effort.
The argument on the squeak list seemed to be: - the squeak epoch has a certain beauty to it, being the turn of the
century
vs - why reinvent the wheel? Everybody already knows what the unix epoch is (e.g. you can point them to Wikipedia)
The full discussion is here:
http://forum.world.st/Re-Pharo-project-Epoch-returns-local-offset-td4630581....
The main thing is to make sure that whatever we use is based on UTC and
not
local time.
So - two options - PharoOffset := 1 January, 1901 UTC - Unix offset
Also, whatever we change it to (and IMHO it really needs to be changed), I think existing live objects from previous Pharos (e.g. that are materialized with fuel) may be invalid (like the recent zip/mcz consequences)
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/who-can-have-a-look-at-Issue-5913-Remove-Squeak-epoch-... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-- best, Eliot
-- best, Eliot