[Numpy-discussion] datetime64 y2k38 bug

Mark Wiebe mwwiebe@gmail....
Fri Sep 30 18:38:03 CDT 2011


On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 8:52 PM, <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Charles R Harris
> <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Charles R Harris
> > <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Benjamin Root <ben.root@ou.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I was working on adding some test cases in numpy for the argmin/max
> >>> functions with some datetime64s.  I found that on my 32-bit machine, it
> >>> fails to parse a date past the Y2.038k date.  I find this odd because
> the
> >>> datetime is supposed to be 64-bits, but I guess there is some
> arch-dependent
> >>> code somewhere?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think that is actually POSIX for the time_t structure. Which is not to
> >> say it's good ;) Google UNIX Year 2038 problem. ISTR reading recently
> that
> >> there is a movement afoot to fix the time_t structure on 32 bit machines
> for
> >> Linux. You've got to wonder, what were the POSIX people thinking?
> >>
> >
> > See comments here.
>
> <OT>
>
> Thanks for the entertaining link
>
> "
> I think it's still perfectly valid to say "you're a moron,
> and we need to fix it"
> "
> (just a quote, doesn't apply to the python community)
>
> Josef
>

I've added a hack to try and work around this problem to the
datetime-cleanup pull request:

https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/161

Basically, for years >= 2038, it uses the year 2036 or 2037 (depending on
whether it's a leap year), then adds the year offset back on. Everything
already worked fine for me on my 64-bit platform, so it needs testing to
confirm the fix works.

-Mark


>
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20110930/ff82cd54/attachment.html 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list