> For 2) consideration of leap seconds is not just otiose, it is wrong. > For 1) it is necessary. > > Consider the case of a pair of microsecond-scale time measurements on either > side of some midnight upon which a leap second is added to > Gregorian time. Would you really wish to have a value of the form v = > 1000000+a µsec figure in a sequence for which mean(v) was 10 µsec?
If you look at a (leap-second-aware) digital clock around midnight you will see: 23:59:58 23:59:59 23:59:60 (the cpu spins to prevent application activity) 00:00:00 00:00:01 etc So the elapsed clocktime actually *is* 1000010 µsec. Most clocks are not aware of the leapsecond and will simply tick: 23:59:58 23:59:59 00:00:00 00:00:01 00:00:02 And are now one second ahead. > More generally, think before you post. ... Fred! ----------------------------------------------------------------- ATTENTION: The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential, and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or opening it. Messages and attachments are scanned for all viruses known. If this message contains password-protected attachments, the files have NOT been scanned for viruses by the ING mail domain. Always scan attachments before opening them. -----------------------------------------------------------------
