Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal

Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13 id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
>
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
>
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
>
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
>
> TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@google.com
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
>
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chromium.org
BUG=598021
Committed: https://crrev.com/3e45becd1da65b4a3ff379fb794cc652d496e07e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405006}

[dadrian, 2016-07-12 17:06:51]

Created Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal

[dadrian, 2016-07-12 17:21:38]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
> 
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
> 
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
# Skipping CQ checks because original CL landed less than 1 days ago.
NOPRESUBMIT=true
NOTREECHECKS=true
NOTRY=true
BUG=598021
==========

to

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
> 
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
> 
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
BUG=598021
==========

[dadrian, 2016-07-12 18:45:50]

I #ifdef'd out the tests that had base::Time's with >32-bit values.
net_unittests are passing on 32-bit now.

I've never done a reland before, I assume I need a new LGTM?

[estark, 2016-07-12 18:55:05]

On 2016/07/12 18:45:50, dadrian wrote:
> I #ifdef'd out the tests that had base::Time's with >32-bit values.
> net_unittests are passing on 32-bit now.
> 
> I've never done a reland before, I assume I need a new LGTM?

Yeah, I'd wait for another LGTM on this.

Sometimes it's appropriate to use TBR (To Be Reviewed --
https://dev.chromium.org/developers/owners-files#TOC-When-to-use-To-Be-Review...)
on relands, but you might need to be a committer to TBR things, plus I'd
probably want to get another LGTM on this anyway.

[engedy, 2016-07-12 19:03:34]

I'd also recommend having an ONWER of this directory taking a look, so they can
chime in on whether they want to prefix the test name with MAYBE_ (see [1])
instead, or whether they'd prefer to find a way so that we don't have to land
disabled tests in the first place. Not sure if there is a better solution that
the current one, but this might be a matter of taste to some extent.

[1]: http://www.chromium.org/developers/tree-sheriffs/sheriff-details-chromium

[dadrian, 2016-07-12 19:40:27]

On 2016/07/12 19:03:34, engedy wrote:
> I'd also recommend having an ONWER of this directory taking a look, so they
can
> chime in on whether they want to prefix the test name with MAYBE_ (see [1])
> instead, or whether they'd prefer to find a way so that we don't have to land
> disabled tests in the first place. Not sure if there is a better solution that
> the current one, but this might be a matter of taste to some extent.
> 
> [1]: http://www.chromium.org/developers/tree-sheriffs/sheriff-details-chromium

@rsleevi: Thoughts?

[Ryan Sleevi, 2016-07-12 20:29:45]

On 2016/07/12 19:40:27, dadrian wrote:
> @rsleevi: Thoughts?

Disabling tests on the platforms we expect it to fail on doesn't really buy us
anything.

Disabling tests by ifdefs instead of maybes/more declarative explanations
doesn't help (that is, at the minimum, this would require better documentation
about *why* these tests are disabled/have different results)

A more productive suggestion would be that, in these tests, you test
base::Time::Explode() for the sentinel ranges you're expecting to test. If the
underlying system time can't represent the time, you should expect the test to
fail. If the underlying system time can represent the time, you should expect
the test to pass. In this approach, you wouldn't need to disable any tests on
any platform.

[dadrian, 2016-07-13 00:07:13]

On 2016/07/12 20:29:45, Ryan Sleevi (extremely slow) wrote:
> On 2016/07/12 19:40:27, dadrian wrote:
> > @rsleevi: Thoughts?
> 
> Disabling tests on the platforms we expect it to fail on doesn't really buy us
> anything.
> 
> Disabling tests by ifdefs instead of maybes/more declarative explanations
> doesn't help (that is, at the minimum, this would require better documentation
> about *why* these tests are disabled/have different results)
> 
> A more productive suggestion would be that, in these tests, you test
> base::Time::Explode() for the sentinel ranges you're expecting to test. If the
> underlying system time can't represent the time, you should expect the test to
> fail. If the underlying system time can represent the time, you should expect
> the test to pass. In this approach, you wouldn't need to disable any tests on
> any platform.

Implemented the suggestion in #7, and all the bots are running again.

[Ryan Sleevi, 2016-07-13 01:17:18]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
File net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:27: TEST(EncodeValuesTest,
EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows) {
More documentation needed.

// Although the ASN.1 GeneralizedTime can represent dates from
// the years 0000 to 9999, and although base::Time can represent
// dates before the Windows epoch, if the underlying system can't
// handle dates within the range, it should not be possible to
// encode as a GeneralizedTime.

That's one sort of half-focused approach to the documentation, but certainly,
these tests are now a bit more magical.

For example, I have no idea why you chose FromUTCExploded vs UTCExplode - if
that was convenience or meaningful. Documentation helps :)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:38: if (base::Time::FromUTCExploded(exploded,
&time)) {
Short-circuit and return early

if (!base::Time::FromUTCExploded(...))
  return

GeneralizedTime generalized_time

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:50: TEST(EncodeValuesTest,
EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax) {
same comments re docs & short-circuit

[dadrian, 2016-07-13 02:38:34]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
File net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:27: TEST(EncodeValuesTest,
EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows) {
On 2016/07/13 01:17:18, Ryan Sleevi (extremely slow) wrote:
> More documentation needed.
> 
> // Although the ASN.1 GeneralizedTime can represent dates from
> // the years 0000 to 9999, and although base::Time can represent
> // dates before the Windows epoch, if the underlying system can't
> // handle dates within the range, it should not be possible to
> // encode as a GeneralizedTime.
> 
> That's one sort of half-focused approach to the documentation, but certainly,
> these tests are now a bit more magical.
> 
> For example, I have no idea why you chose FromUTCExploded vs UTCExplode - if
> that was convenience or meaningful. Documentation helps :)

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:38: if (base::Time::FromUTCExploded(exploded,
&time)) {
On 2016/07/13 01:17:18, Ryan Sleevi (extremely slow) wrote:
> Short-circuit and return early
> 
> if (!base::Time::FromUTCExploded(...))
>   return
> 
> GeneralizedTime generalized_time

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/200001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:50: TEST(EncodeValuesTest,
EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax) {
On 2016/07/13 01:17:18, Ryan Sleevi (extremely slow) wrote:
> same comments re docs & short-circuit

Done.

[Ryan Sleevi, 2016-07-13 02:43:37]

The CQ bit was checked by rsleevi@chromium.org

[Ryan Sleevi, 2016-07-13 02:43:37]

lgtm

[Ryan Sleevi, 2016-07-13 02:43:37]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from estark@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/#ps220001
(title: "Add documentation, abort early.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 02:45:16]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:15:21]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
> 
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
> 
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
BUG=598021
==========

to

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
> 
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
> 
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
BUG=598021
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:15:23]

Committed patchset #4 (id:220001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:15:27]

CQ bit was unchecked.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:17:02]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
> 
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
> 
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
BUG=598021
==========

to

==========
Reland of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #1 id:1 of
https://codereview.chromium.org/2138413002/ )

Reason for revert:
Fix broken 32-bit tests

Original issue's description:
> Revert of Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal (patchset #13
id:240001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2091103002/ )
>
> Reason for revert:
> Causes reliable test failures on Linux Tests (dbg)(1)(32):
>
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeAfterTimeTMax
> EncodeValuesTest.EncodeTimeFromBeforeWindows
>
> Original issue's description:
> > Add CheckOCSPDateValid() to net/cert/internal
> >
> > Intended to be used internally by certificate validation as part of OCSP
> > validity checks and Expect-Staple.
> >
> > BUG=598021
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/687cf9fffda1a7eb45c80a596fa4f9e3e524f0e4
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404708}
>
>
TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,dadrian@goo...
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=598021
>
> Committed: https://crrev.com/144744b5cced306a06d167f2e34610378f6336ea
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404802}

TBR=rsleevi@chromium.org,svaldez@chromium.org,estark@chromium.org,engedy@chro...
BUG=598021

Committed: https://crrev.com/3e45becd1da65b4a3ff379fb794cc652d496e07e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405006}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:17:04]

Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/3e45becd1da65b4a3ff379fb794cc652d496e07e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405006}

[Lei Zhang, 2016-07-14 10:39:50]

thestig@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ thestig@chromium.org

[Lei Zhang, 2016-07-14 10:39:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
File net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp.h:21: class Time;
Luckily, TimeDelta is declared somewhere.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
File net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc:19: const base::TimeDelta
kOCSPAgeOneWeek = base::TimeDelta::FromDays(7);
Not 100% sure if this adds a static initializer, but since this is in a unit
test and we don't check unit test binaries... *shrug*

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc:308: #ifdef OS_WIN
#if defined(OS_WIN)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values.h
File net/der/encode_values.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values....
net/der/encode_values.h:1: // Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors. All rights
reserved.
2016 is more than half way over.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values....
net/der/encode_values.h:23: der::GeneralizedTime* generalized_time);
Do you still need der:: inside namespace net::der?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
File net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:43: base::Time::Exploded exploded;
Something is uninitialized here, which is the real reason I'm doing a drive by
review. Please fix. https://crbug.com/628177

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:69: base::Time::Exploded exploded;
Ditto

[dadrian, 2016-07-14 17:37:29]

thestig: Comments addressed in https://codereview.chromium.org/2148303002/

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
File net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp.h:21: class Time;
On 2016/07/14 10:39:50, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> Luckily, TimeDelta is declared somewhere.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
File net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc:19: const base::TimeDelta
kOCSPAgeOneWeek = base::TimeDelta::FromDays(7);
On 2016/07/14 10:39:50, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> Not 100% sure if this adds a static initializer, but since this is in a unit
> test and we don't check unit test binaries... *shrug*

IIRC it does not, since TimeDelta::FromDays is constexpr.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/cert/internal/pars...
net/cert/internal/parse_ocsp_unittest.cc:308: #ifdef OS_WIN
On 2016/07/14 10:39:50, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> #if defined(OS_WIN)

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values.h
File net/der/encode_values.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values....
net/der/encode_values.h:1: // Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors. All rights
reserved.
On 2016/07/14 10:39:51, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> 2016 is more than half way over.

Wow! Is it?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values....
net/der/encode_values.h:23: der::GeneralizedTime* generalized_time);
On 2016/07/14 10:39:51, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> Do you still need der:: inside namespace net::der?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
File net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:43: base::Time::Exploded exploded;
On 2016/07/14 10:39:51, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> Something is uninitialized here, which is the real reason I'm doing a drive by
> review. Please fix. https://crbug.com/628177

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2144693002/diff/220001/net/der/encode_values_...
net/der/encode_values_unittest.cc:69: base::Time::Exploded exploded;
On 2016/07/14 10:39:51, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> Ditto

Done.

[Lei Zhang, 2016-07-14 23:12:41]

On 2016/07/14 17:37:29, dadrian wrote:
> thestig: Comments addressed in https://codereview.chromium.org/2148303002/

Thanks for addressing them quickly!

> On 2016/07/14 10:39:51, Lei Zhang (Slow Thursday) wrote:
> > 2016 is more than half way over.
> 
> Wow! Is it?

Wasn't sure if you had a time machine. ;)