Alex Shinn scripsit: > As you say, there are generally two uses of monotonic time - as a > timer, and as a timestamp (and basis for conversion to calendar time). > POSIX time is completely unusable for the former because it jumps a > second.
True but irrelevant, because we provide jiffy-based time, which should be based on monotonic timers if the OS makes them available. > It is also broken for the latter because it is unable to represent the > distinction between the first and second repetition of a leap second. > POSIX time was a mistake that should not be repeated. Unfortunately, it's what essentially all systems except embedded ones actually have available. But I don't wish to rehearse the same debate that WG1 already had. > TAI time has neither of these problems - it is clearly the Right > Thing. We call the scale we are using TAI, but what it really is is the number of UTC seconds (which is the same as the number of TAI seconds, which is the same as the number of SI seconds) since the Posix epoch (which dates back to before the beginning of UTC). -- John Cowan [email protected] http://ccil.org/~cowan If a traveler were informed that such a man [as Lord John Russell] was leader of the House of Commons, he may well begin to comprehend how the Egyptians worshiped an insect. --Benjamin Disraeli _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
