08-31-2025, 08:19 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2025, 08:30 AM by Eric Pearson.)
> probably better to use (...) the number of seconds (optionally including milliseconds0) since January 1, 1970, at 00:00:00.
Horses for courses. I work with data going back to 1960, so I prefer FILETIME: the number of 100-nanosecond units since the start of January 1, 1601. PowerTime is based on FILETIME. But if I was a cosmologist working on the age of the universe, even that would not have enough range, and I wouldn't need nanosecond precision.
For the OP's needs, the onlly reason I'd prefer FILETIME is that it is native to the compiler, and Windows uses FILETIME under the hood for everything.
Horses for courses. I work with data going back to 1960, so I prefer FILETIME: the number of 100-nanosecond units since the start of January 1, 1601. PowerTime is based on FILETIME. But if I was a cosmologist working on the age of the universe, even that would not have enough range, and I wouldn't need nanosecond precision.
For the OP's needs, the onlly reason I'd prefer FILETIME is that it is native to the compiler, and Windows uses FILETIME under the hood for everything.