the ``need'' for POSIX times
cowan at locke.ccil.org
Fri Oct 9 19:26:15 UTC 1998
Paul Eggert wrote:
> [O]n an implementation whose internal clock
> ticks TAI, the UTC clock ticks right along with the internal clock --
> except during an inserted leap second, where the UTC clock is adjusted
> back by one second.
What's official about that? I don't see how a UTC clock has been
"adjusted backward". Rather, a UTC minute can sometimes contain
61 seconds, properly labeled from 0 to 60. Similarly, a UTC day
sometimes contains 86401 seconds. This is not at all the same
as adjusting a clock, where the clock was wrong before and is
hopefully now correct.
> When converting a UTC clock to a printed representation, it's
> conventional to use :60 for the inserted leap second, but this is
> merely a notation to indicate that the UTC clock is repeating,
Do you have some kind of authority for this claim?
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
More information about the tz