Re: [LEAPSECS] Mechanism to provide tai-utc.dat locally

From: M. Warner Losh <imp_at_BSDIMP.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 21:56:05 -0700 (MST)

In message: <20061226030542.GB6416_at_fysh.org>
            Zefram <zefram_at_fysh.org> writes:
: Steve Allen wrote:
: > and if I continue that practice
: >I can later give you an estimate of how wrong I was when I told you.
:
: This is something that's missing from current chronological APIs.
: It needs to be formalised.

time_t is so totally broken, it isn't funny. That's the closest thing
to a standardized API there is for time. All others are stuff folks
have done here or there, but they aren't universal enough to be
considered.

Too bad the problems with time_t are well known, well discussed and
well enumerated. Or rather I should say "too bad POSIX doesn't care
enough to change it" since the cost of changing time_t is huge...

Also, things in TAI time don't care either. 1 day, 1 year, 100 years
don't matter to TAI. Periodic things that happen at a given time of
day (UTC) are the only things that do care.

Warner
Received on Mon Dec 25 2006 - 20:59:09 PST