Subj : Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year
To : All
From :
[email protected]
Date : Sun Jan 01 2017 04:12 pm
Subject: Re: 'Leap Second' to Be Added on New Year's Eve This Year
From: Mark Lloyd <
[email protected]>
On 01/01/2017 12:46 PM, Wally W. wrote:
[snip]
> As I understand it, NT time uses a signed integer and tops out at
> 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF = in the year 30828
>
> Unhappily, no sources suggest using negative integers will allow
> setting the timestamp before the year 1600.
What is the resolution of this clock? You get hundreds of billions of
years if you count seconds since 1970.
1600 is a leap year, like 2000 and 2400. Maybe it has something to do
with that.
> Otherwise, timestamps could be set for any date in known history; as
> in 4004 BC, which by some counts includes Day One.
The PHP I use has a strange "hole", where you can't set (with mktime) a
year in the range of 0-100*. IIRC earlier years can be set, but it's one
off (it thinks there is a year 0). 4004 BC** would be specified as -4003.
* - I think this is a "convenience" that made sense with a 32-bit time_t
where it adds 2000 to 0-79 and 1900 to 80-100, both 0 and 100 become 2000.
** - I try to use CE / BCE instead of AD / BC. The numbers are the same,
and it avoids a particular assumption.
[snip]
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/
"In our sad condition, our only consolation is the expectancy of another
life. Here below all is incomprehensible." [Martin Luther, Table Talk]
--- ViaMAIL!/WC v2.00
* Origin: ViaMAIL! - Lightning Fast Mailer for Wildcat! (1:261/20)
