Long term, we seem to need to add about 1 second per year every 150 years, and after about 55,000 years every day will be 24 hours and 1 second long.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 8:14 PM Paul Gilmartin <0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:44:27 -0500, Mike Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >My idea for doing the fall back would be change the fall back time to > >0100. Leap forward from 005959 to 020000, no problem. But for fall > >back, 235959 continues to 240000 to 245959 then the next day at > >000000, resulting in no overlapping times. > > > I believe this has been suggested on the tzdata mailing list: > https://www.iana.org/time-zones > ... but I don't know that the archives are searchable. > > Of course that would eliminate the overlap. But how much user and > system software would need to be updated to accommodate it? > > At a minimum, the TIME macro would need to be updated to return > those values from 240000 to 245959. And many validity checks would > need to be weakened. > > IBM can't even get TIME to return 23:59:60 during a leap second. > (With suitable settings, Linux can do so.) > > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
