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

[Charles Kerr]

Per Hedeland wrote:

> 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...

You're right on both counts, I think. :)