> On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: > > > UTC was not defined before 1972-01-01. In DateTime, "utc" is used as > time > > zone before 1972. The behaviour of our "utc" before 1972 is undefined, > and > > it's perfectly possible to have a leap second 1971-12-31T23:59:60. > > Except that UTC is *defined* as being UTC-TAI = 10s on 1972-01-01.
Yes, but the difference on 1971-12-31 is undefined. For our utc time zone, we could define "utc"-TAI = 9s on 1971-12-31. Why we would want do do that, I don't know. But we could. > You mean DateTime::Format::Epoch::TAI64 or is there another module not on > CPAN? Anyways, hopefully that's the only DateTime::* module that will have > any breakage... I was more worried about end user code. That's the one I meant. I don't think there's much user code out there that even cares about leap seconds. Eugene
