Re: [PATCH v3] date: detect underflow/overflow when parsing dates with timezone offset

> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> It's even OK to use a hard coded constant for the number of days
>>> since the epoch to the git-end-of-time ;-)
>>
>> That's why I noted it as a _Nit_, mostly because it wasn't anything big.
>> But I found that part of it being dynamic and part of it being static
>> was inconsistent.
>
> Sure, but it is so tiny thing, we shouldn't waste more time than we
> spend getting the tests right even on 32-bit systems.  We seem to be
> doing the opposite by talking about this part even more, which is a
> bit sad.  Any comments on the actual patch I sent as a follow-up?
>