From: "Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com>
Subject: Re: Leap Seconds
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 11:31:35 -0400
Date: 2001-05-31T15:31:38+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9f5o4q$j97$1@nh.pace.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: mailman.991301489.12794.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2754 bytes --]
O.K. See my other post above - I phrased my original statement badly. You
are right that a measure of absolute seconds is going to remain constant. I
was thinking with respect to computing those seconds relative to dates. We
agree on a date/time to meet. You compute the seconds between now and then
and I compute the seconds between now and then and we both delay N seconds.
Your computation involves leap-seconds and mine doesn't. We've got a problem
in that one of us will be there early.
MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web: http://www.mcondic.com/
"Wilhelm Spickermann" <Wilhelm.Spickermann@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:mailman.991301489.12794.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
> Sorry, no -- or at least at a different point. If we meet "1234567890
seconds
> from epoch XXX" then no one will be early (if no one travels at too
relativistic
> speeds). The second is a well defined unit and there is no choice of
> measurement. There is no leap second problem, if we use time differences
to an
> epoch.
> If we don�t want any leap second tables or regular updates for them, then
> requiring that only "event_start_time" is used is just what we need to do
that.
>
> The leap second problem occurs if we use human oriented component times
like
> "5-dec-2011 14:23:22.5 UTC". Assume I could predict the time of the next
earth
> quake in San Francisco precisely to the millisecond (far future assumed).
Then
> I know when it will be -- but I don�t know how to tell it in component
time
> because of the future leap seconds decisions.
> The leap second problem also occurs if someone uses varying length "units"
like
> "minute". If we start just a second before a leap second and add 3 seconds
and
> then one minute, we will not get the same result as if we add the minute
first
> and the seconds then.
>
> BTW: In the good old days unixes used to have a clock which was a "time
> difference to an epoch". But the POSIX time_t values we have now are _not_
"time
> differences to an epoch" -- they are just a tightly packed form of a
component
> time with the funny property, that it would designate a time difference if
> there wouldn�t have been any leap seconds.
>
> ...
> > Tucker Taft seems to indicate that there isn't anything in the standard
or
> > the validation suite to check for leap second computations. I'm inclined
to
>
> If Ada.Calendar.Time_Of is called with a duration 86400.0 and then
> converted back with Ada.Calendar.Split, we will get a duration of 0.0 (ARM
> 9.6(25)). So I think that Ada.Calendar cannot be used for computations if
you
> care for a second.
>
> Wilhelm
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-05-31 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-25 14:17 Leap Seconds Marin David Condic
2001-05-25 22:02 ` Tucker Taft
2001-05-29 14:43 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-29 16:02 ` Ted Dennison
2001-05-29 16:46 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-29 18:38 ` tmoran
2001-05-29 19:26 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-30 18:20 ` Wilhelm Spickermann
2001-05-30 18:55 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-30 23:16 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-05-31 6:34 ` Joseph P Vlietstra
2001-05-31 9:27 ` Wilhelm Spickermann
2001-05-31 15:31 ` Marin David Condic [this message]
2001-06-01 7:55 ` Wilhelm Spickermann
2001-06-01 13:34 ` Marin David Condic
2001-06-01 15:24 ` Wes Groleau
2001-06-01 16:18 ` Marin David Condic
2001-06-01 20:28 ` Wes Groleau
2001-06-04 13:54 ` Marin David Condic
2001-06-04 16:05 ` Wes Groleau
2001-06-04 16:15 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-31 16:53 ` OT: Relativity misunderstood Wes Groleau
2001-05-31 17:20 ` Ted Dennison
2001-05-31 19:00 ` Wes Groleau
2001-06-01 6:49 ` Wilhelm Spickermann
2001-06-04 17:51 ` [OT] Black holes for interstellar travel (Re: OT: Relativity misunderstood) Jacob Sparre Andersen
2001-06-05 14:07 ` Wes Groleau
2001-05-30 0:42 ` Leap Seconds Arthur Evans Jr
2001-05-30 10:14 ` AG
2001-05-30 11:20 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-05-31 16:34 ` Wes Groleau
2001-05-30 14:00 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-30 15:33 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-05-30 15:39 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-31 2:01 ` Robert A Duff
2001-05-31 3:15 ` dale
2001-05-31 7:02 ` tmoran
2001-05-31 15:26 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-31 16:39 ` Paul Storm
2001-06-02 6:40 ` Joseph P Vlietstra
2001-05-31 16:36 ` Wes Groleau
2001-05-31 18:12 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-30 16:36 ` Darren New
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox