Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-07 Thread Warner Losh
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Zefram wrote: > Clive D.W. Feather wrote: >>probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures >>be designed to handle this case or not bother? > > Data structures should certainly allow for the possibility, but in >

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-07 Thread Zefram
Clive D.W. Feather wrote: >probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures >be designed to handle this case or not bother? Data structures should certainly allow for the possibility, but in space-constrained cases can be optimised based on the understanding that it's

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-07 Thread Tom Van Baak
org> To: "Tom Van Baak" <t...@leapsecond.com>; "Leap Second Discussion List" <leapsecs@leapsecond.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2017 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC > Tom Van Baak said: >> Yes, of course. This is not the 1960's

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-07 Thread Clive D.W. Feather
Tom Van Baak said: > Yes, of course. This is not the 1960's where saving a byte was an all-day > decision. The spec is clear. Follow it. Actually, some of us work in fields where every byte is still expensive. -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: cl...@davros.org

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-05 Thread GERRY ASHTON
> On February 4, 2017 at 4:41 PM "Clive D.W. Feather" wrote: > > > Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the > probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures > be designed to handle this case or not bother? > In

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Brooks Harris
On 2017-02-04 03:27 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-02-04 12:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Looking only into the future, not historical data, what

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Warner Losh
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: > On 2017-02-04 12:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather >> wrote: >>> >>> Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think >>> the >>>

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Brooks Harris
On 2017-02-04 12:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures be designed to handle

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Warner Losh
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Warner Losh wrote: > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: >> Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the >> probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Warner Losh
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the > probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures > be designed to handle this case or not bother? Doubtful, but not

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Tom Van Baak
) if you lie to a time scale it will get revenge. /tvb - Original Message - From: "Clive D.W. Feather" <cl...@davros.org> To: "Leap Second Discussion List" <leapsecs@leapsecond.com> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2017 8:41 AM Subject: [LEAPSECS] N

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread John Sauter
On Sat, 2017-02-04 at 16:41 +, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people > think the > probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data > structures > be designed to handle this case or not bother? > I think it is very unlikely

[LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

2017-02-04 Thread Clive D.W. Feather
Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures be designed to handle this case or not bother? -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: cl...@davros.org | it will