Re: Leap Seconds

[Wes Groleau <wwgrol@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>]

> Bzzzzzzzzzttt! Wrong Answer! :-) I can neither change the hardware I'm
> programming nor can I change the specification of the data being sent to me.

In the first place, I was teasing, but in the second place ....

> Its always nice to simply define your problems away, ....
> .... I'm not going to sweat it too much. Being off by a few seconds
> is not going to kill the system and I am leaving a method open for the
> operator to remotely download "tuning constants" which will include an
> offset to time. If they really need to get the accuracy up to match the
> incoming message, they can send me the number of seconds to adjust by.

.... you just designed an implementation that doesn't need one.

Quod erat desideratum.   :-)

(I am not a Latin scholar, nor do I play one on the internet.)

> "Wes Groleau" <wwgrol@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> wrote in message
> news:3B17B3B8.B0626F22@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com...
> > With such a clear statement of the problem, the solution becomes obvious.
> > You need to either get such a clock or design an implementation that
> doesn't
> > need one.  Which is what many of the posts were trying to do for you, sort
> of.

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau