Re: [Pan-users] ANN: Pan 0.94 "Ready! Fire! Aim!"

[Per Hedeland]

"Charles Kerr" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> "Charles Kerr" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>-  const int diff_secs (std::max (1l, now-_time_started));
>>>+  const int diff_secs (std::max ((time_t)1, now-_time_started));
>>>
>>>Smells like a more correct fix to me -- does it pass muster on BSD?
>>
>> Yeah, that's fine too (though I think the "smell" is the only
>> conceivable difference:-).
>
>Until January 19, 2038. :)

Well, I must confess to not being well versed in C++ function
overloading (nor C++ in general in fact), but I seriously doubt that it
will make a difference even then, when we've hopefully had 64-bit
time_t's for quite some years - i.e. I assume that the second arg will
ensure that a max() with "big enough" args are chosen, and that the '1'
will be promoted as needed. But this really is a dead horse...

--Per