On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Belopolsky <ndar...@mac.com> wrote:
> Since Guido hates leap seconds, PEP 495 is silent on this issue, but > strictly speaking UTC leap seconds are "folds." AFAICT, a strictly POSIX > system must repeat the same value of time_t when a leap second is > inserted. While datetime will never extend the second field to > allow second=60, with PEP 495, it is now possible to represent 23:59:60 as 23:59:59/fold=1. Thanks -- If anyhone decides to actually get arond to leap seconds suport in numpy datetime, se can decide whether to do folds or allow second: 60. Off the top of my head, I think allowing a 60th second makes more sense -- jsut like we do leap years. Granted, external systems often don't understand/allow a 60th second, but they generally don't understand a fold bit, either.... -CHB > Apart from leap seconds, there is no need to use "fold" on datetimes that > represent time in UTC or any timezone at a fixed offset from utc. > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion