Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year

Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year

[Björn Lundin]

On 2017-01-13 07:51, Tim wrote:

>>
> Speaking as a former programmer, for 99.9% of the programs out there, 
> adding a Leap Second doesn't really mean anything. Where it gets 
> interesting is when the program is dealing with seconds and portions of 
> seconds - sometimes very minute portions of seconds. Then one had to look 
> very closely at how one handles things. 

(just saw that I replied to not c.l.a)

Or just something trivial as church bells

Story in Swedish

<https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2017-01-02/kyrkklockorna-ringde-in-aret--i-nio-timmar>

 but the geist of it is that the
church bells were ringing early in the morning
(just after midnight that is) Jan 2nd
and not Jan 1st

The bells should ring in the new year, but failed.
This is the first time a computer controlled the ringing.

Now- I think the program was polling the time,
and when it polled 00:00:01 - and checked the date,
it actually found 23:59:60 and concluded that this is the
wrong day => do not start ringing.

The day after - at 00:00:01 it did the same thing, and
the bells started to ring in the new year - 24 hours too late...


Yes - I speculate - but I don't think leap seconds only affect
super-duper-time-sensitive calcuations.

--
Björn

Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year

[Dennis Lee Bieber]

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:24:21 +0100, Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com>
declaimed the following:

>The bells should ring in the new year, but failed.
>This is the first time a computer controlled the ringing.
>
>Now- I think the program was polling the time,
>and when it polled 00:00:01 - and checked the date,
>it actually found 23:59:60 and concluded that this is the
>wrong day => do not start ringing.
>
>The day after - at 00:00:01 it did the same thing, and
>the bells started to ring in the new year - 24 hours too late...
>
>
>Yes - I speculate - but I don't think leap seconds only affect
>super-duper-time-sensitive calcuations.

	Could be something as simple as cycling from 23:59:59 to 24:00:00
(still not the "new day") followed by 00:00:01 (new day, but not midnight)
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year

[Björn Lundin]

On 2017-01-13 13:51, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:24:21 +0100, Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com>
> declaimed the following:
> 
>> The bells should ring in the new year, but failed.
>> This is the first time a computer controlled the ringing.
>>
>> Now- I think the program was polling the time,
>> and when it polled 00:00:01 - and checked the date,
>> it actually found 23:59:60 and concluded that this is the
>> wrong day => do not start ringing.
>>
>> The day after - at 00:00:01 it did the same thing, and
>> the bells started to ring in the new year - 24 hours too late...
>>
>>
>> Yes - I speculate - but I don't think leap seconds only affect
>> super-duper-time-sensitive calcuations.
> 
> 	Could be something as simple as cycling from 23:59:59 to 24:00:00
> (still not the "new day") followed by 00:00:01 (new day, but not midnight)
> 

Yes- but suspect that it only happened at leap-second day, and not
any other day...

-- 
--
Björn