Talk:C date and time functions

message: Wikipedia is not C documentation.
:Why not? What else would you put here? --a_dergachev 07:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is correct, see WP:NOT#HOWTO. -- intgr [talk] 14:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah Guys.. Just something to think about.. An encyclopedic Article on time.h would be - well just useless. And i'm happy with the english wikipedia as it is, with thousands of articles to even minor details, headerfiles, comic characters and so on. Please just don't take the german wiki as model, its so full of relevancy that it became entirely irrelevant. Rules like the NO-HOWTO are nice, but only IF the article would be better in an encyclopedic form - not in this case.77.11.26.13 (talk) 20:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not C documentation 

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:C standard library - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 09:40, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Regarding the "time_t - time since epoch type".
This is not true actually as shown in the specification http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf
See on page 350 at 7.23.1.(4) Components of time: "The range and precision of times representable in clock_t and time_t are implementation-defined.".
Thus, it should be "time_t - time since epoch type for most compilers such as gcc"!
(see http://ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/Manuals/glibc-2.2.3/html_chapter/libc_21.html)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.120.156 (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what was wrong with the previous statement. time_t means "time since epoch" or "calendar time" in all contexts as per specification. The undefined thing is the format of the type, not what it represents. Thus since the previous definition doesn't specify anything about the format, it's still correct. 1exec1 (talk) 16:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no requirement in C that time_t be implemented as time since an epoch.  (Posix requires this, but not C.)  I've updated several function descriptions accordingly. —Steve Summit (talk) 16:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: time_t

message: I propose to rename the article from C date and time operations to C date and time functions per WP:COMMONNAME. 1exec1 (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I've received exactly zero input, I've moved the page. If anyone disagrees, please express your concerns here. Thanks. 1exec1 (talk) 16:20, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed rename 

message: The information is also incomplete. It only discusses those functions that deal with second precision. I came here hoping to find useful information for micro- or nanosecond double values, not merely int equivalents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by  71.179.41.98 (talk • contribs) 
:New topics go at the bottom of the talk page. Each topic should have its own title. Each comment should be signed by placing 4 tilde characters at the end (ie ~~~~).
:This page covers all the functions of the standard C library. The standard C library only goes down to seconds. Anything more precise is handled by extensions or alternatives to the standard C library and is therefore not meant to be covered in this article.  Stepho  talk  20:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completeness