On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Nicolas Cellier <
nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 2014-04-19 15:29 GMT+02:00 David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>:
>
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 09:12:47AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 10:34:04AM +0200, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>> > > Hi Dave,
>> > > did you lurk at the work in Pharo?
>> > > I think they followed similar approach, but they kept jdn seconds and
>> > > nanos, representing time in UTC, and they used UTC clock exlcusively.
>> > > It would be interesting to compare the timings vs latest Pharo (3.0).
>> >
>> > Hi Nicolas,
>> >
>> > Yes, I'm aware of the Pharo work.
>> >
>> > The approach that I am trying now is based on my earlier work with the
>> > Olson time zone tables in http://www.squeaksource.com/TimeZoneDatabase.
>>
>> <OT>
>> Well, what do you know, it seems that I just got my first link from
>> Wikipedia.
>> On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database#Use_in_software_systems there
>> is a link for "The Squeak Smalltalk time package" that points to the Olson
>> time zone database for Squeak.
>> </OT>
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
> Congrats for the fame ;)
> And thanks for reporting your observations about Integer and Fraction
> efficiency.
> A 64 bits Spur should also scale our SmallIntegers up to 2^62, which can
> completely change the figures anyway.
>

Likely 2^60.  3 bits for tags, 1 bit for sign, hence SmallInteger maxVal =
(2^60) - 1 , which is 36,000 years into the future :-)

DateAndTime fromSeconds: (1 << 60) - 1 // 1000000 38435-08-17T21:30:06-07:00

-- 
best,
Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20140419/3400f5a4/attachment.htm