[time-nuts] Leap Quirks
cfharris at erols.com
Sun Jan 4 09:57:01 EST 2009
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <4960027E.1000103 at erols.com>, Chuck Harris writes:
>> Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>>> Ok, that is news to me. Are you saying that (pulling a number out of
>>>> the air) time_t = 21120123 could be followed by 21120123 on a year where
>>>> we added a leap second?
>>> Apart from the number, that is exactly what happens: The last
>>> second of the (UTC) day is recycled twice.
>> [...] and all of the sources I have found
>> concur that time_t is the number of seconds since 1/1/1970 UTC without
>> regard to leap seconds.
>> When did this change?
> Never, that's the trouble.
> time_t is better defined as:
> d * 86400 + min(rs, 86399)
> d = Number of complete days since 1970-01-01H00:00:00Z
> rs = number of seconds since UTC midnight.
> Eliminating leapseconds would make it correct however.
Language is such a problem with these discussions. Your equation
says exactly what I believe to be true, but your use of the word
correct muddles everything for me. POSIXly correct, and unixly
correct is when time_t follows your equation. Following UTC is
another kind of correct: politically correct.
I believe your use of the phrase "make it correct" shows your bias
towards removing the leap second corrections from UTC. This is my
bias as well.
More information about the time-nuts