On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 06:18:32PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:58 PM Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> One question: Regarding date2timestamp_no_overflow(), should we rename
>> it to date2double? We can't use date2timestamp_safe because we already
>> have that function. The renaming is relevant because this function
>> converts a date to the double data type, which allows us to remove the
>> "_no_overflow" extension.
>
> Makes sense to me.
Yes, it would be nice to change all this area at once to remain
consistent across the board. date2timestamp_no_overflow() is the last
"no_overflow" routine in date.h.
--
Michael