Re: master d0c77a1: Remove some assumptions about timestamp format

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 13:46:51 -0700
> Cc: address@hidden
> 
> I'm afraid we need something better than that, as it mishandles NaNs. 
> Also, there's no need for a special "invalid_time" value; you can just 
> use a NaN.

It's OK to support NaNs in time values, but I'm uneasy with the
recommendation to use NaN as an invalid time.  IMO, NaNs should only
come out of calculations, never from initial literal values of a
program (except when the program wants to test NaN handling).

What is the problem with having a special invalid time value?