OSDev.org

what if you use a signed 64-bit variable for the seconds and an unsigned decimal 64-bit variable for the subsecond, based on the Unix epoch? That way, taking bit 0 and bits 33 to 63 will give you a valid Unix timestamp (that's identical) and you can make timestamps for any exact time/date for way more than the big bang in a resolution that's down to a multiple of 54 zeptoseconds (which is a millionth femtosecond, which is a millionth nanosecond, which is a billionth second).

It's only a linear amount larger than the unix timestamp (four fold, which is like a fart nowadays compared to the relative size of a unix timestamp in the time of VAXen), backwards-compatible in full (as far as the unix timestamp can do it that is) and precise enough for any calculation you should want to do (and if it overflows, it's infinite for any practical purpose).

Of course, [000...000] is negative infinity (before the big bang-era) and [111...111] is positive infinity (after the end of the universe, with a high degree of probability).

I intended not to post further in this thread, to put it to rest, but seeing as several other people are irritated by me, I'll try to explain why.

I have a deep problem with fundamentalism, especially the religious kind. And Crazed123 really mastered the art:

Crazed123 wrote: The whole point of the joke is to epoch from a non-arbitrary date, which January 1, 1970 wasn't back when Unix was started up.

The 1970-01-01 epoch was chosen because, at the time the corresponding code was written, that date had just passed, and it is easily remembered. Meaning, you don't have to deal with negative timestamps, and you get the most from the available 32-bit range.

Other epochs were 1858-11-17 (base date of US Naval Observatory's ephemerides, VMS) and 1904-01-01 (Macintosh, dunno why).

But that is not the point. The point is that Crazed123 makes it sound as if a date guessculated from the bible is less arbitrary than any of the above.

And it's not by accident either:

So the point was that the birth of the universe was one of the more important dates to epoch from.

After all that has been said in this thread already about the calendars of other cultures and scientific findings, Crazed123 still speaks of "the birth of the universe". See point 3) of my previous gripe.

And yes, there is (quite some, albeit not personal) animosity involved since the two of us clashed in the [urlhttp://www.mega-tokyo.com/forum/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=8222]Creation vs. Evolution[/url] thread.

I classify radical Christianism in the same drawer as radical Islamism, Zionism, and Racism. Give an inch, give a mile. Might be the upbringing in post-war Germany: I just can't stand propaganda.

Solar wrote: The 1970-01-01 epoch was chosen because, at the time the corresponding code was written, that date had just passed, and it is easily remembered. Meaning, you don't have to deal with negative timestamps, and you get the most from the available 32-bit range.

Other epochs were 1858-11-17 (base date of US Naval Observatory's ephemerides, VMS) and 1904-01-01 (Macintosh, dunno why).

But that is not the point. The point is that Crazed123 makes it sound as if a date guessculated from the bible is less arbitrary than any of the above.

And it's not by accident either:

So the point was that the birth of the universe was one of the more important dates to epoch from.

After all that has been said in this thread already about the calendars of other cultures and scientific findings, Crazed123 still speaks of "the birth of the universe". See point 3) of my previous gripe.

The best point to start your second counter is the point where you know exactly which second something happens. Now, or something close to it is ALWAYS more reliable than even 1904 or something else.

I classify radical Christianism in the same drawer as radical Islamism, Zionism, and Racism. Give an inch, give a mile. Might be the upbringing in post-war Germany: I just can't stand propaganda.

I share your views on radical religion. It's not just Germany.

Maaan...

Well, i could as well say, let's give it a rest.

In my opinion this been a harmless joke, for gods damned sake. Do we agree here?

That Crazed123 can't help strewing in the one or other hint at his beliefs, blah, be it at that. It's in his genes, can't be helped, I daresay.

I've had argument with him too, remember, but I chose to leave them in that thread. No grudges from not agreeing, ok? We are *GROWN UPS*, heaven, hell and a dozen o' curses alltogether. HInts can be left stood alone, ignored, what ever.

Ok, and just to make sure: I can't stand radicalism either but neither can I call myself tolerant and not tolerate the intolernce/ignorance of others.

Be it at that: enjoy an argument, HAVE an argument, clash together - but for heavens sake, act as grownups do - in other realms act peaceful together. No need to set up a feud here.

beyond infinity wrote: In my opinion this been a harmless joke, for gods damned sake. Do we agree here?

Yep. Couldn't really find the funny part about it, but perhaps that's just me.

It's the subsequent posts that got me worked up.

That Crazed123 can't help strewing in the one or other hint at his beliefs, blah, be it at that. It's in his genes, can't be helped, I daresay.

That is where I disagree. I prefer to oppose such POV's as early as possible - e.g. in this forum. Same way I speak up about racist remarks on the bus.

HInts can be left stood alone, ignored, what ever.

Yes, but that gives them time to spread and grow until you wake up some day and your kid gets it taught at school for a fact.

Ok, and just to make sure: I can't stand radicalism either but neither can I call myself tolerant and not tolerate the intolernce/ignorance of others.

In a philosophical text that's fine and dandy. I don't have a problem with deeply religious people. May they believe what makes 'em happy. It's the moment they start spreading pamphlets in the street, lobby for a change of school curriculums and generally try to evangelize the rest of the world that I start having a problem with them.

...but for heavens sake, act as grownups do - in other realms act peaceful together. No need to set up a feud here.

No prob for me. I could probably work with Crazed123 on the same SW project, as long as lunchtime talk isn't about that subject...

OK, I got the message across, I think. For my part, let it rest. Crazed123, if you want to discuss it in private, feel free to send me a PM.

Why does a joke start a flamewar? Let him assume the world is 6,000 years old (I agree with him, but that's beside the point, and please don't flame me for saying so).

It's a fine joke, and who cares if it conflicts with your religious beliefs?! There are plenty of jokes about jews or christians, and we aren't up in arms about it! Geez!

This thread was put to rest two-and-a-half weeks ago by the participating parties.

Dragging it up again isn't the smart way to go about it, especially since a "who cares if it conflicts with your religious beliefs" isn't exactly a soother.

Let it rest.