The link specified in Chris Craddock's post is indeed an interesting one,
not least because it is so parochial. There is just a soupçon that the
initiative to abolish UTC is an American, and indeed an American military
one.
One treats software problems by writing better code, not by legislating some
desired simplification of reality. (I am rerminded of the perhaps
apocryphal story that the Nebraska State Legislature once tried to make the
value of π equal to exactly 3 'for the convenijence of Nebraska
farmers'.
As I have made clear in other posts, there is no theoretical or practical
problem in embodying provision for leap seconds, even negative ones, in the
date-time calculations done by computers.
These calculations are, however, a specialist topic. Subroutine libraries
should be used to do them,
and this is insufficiently understood by applications programmers.
John Gilmore
Ashland, MA 01721-1817
USA
From: Shane G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: PDF? (was: When was the leap second inserted?)
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 15:42:08 -0600
Interesting story caught my eye ...
http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1466849.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
