On Tue 2012/01/24 16:53:37 PDT, Rob Seaman wrote in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List <[email protected]>
>Might I suggest that "real" is a poor descriptor here (no >philosophy intended)? There is a vast prior art of "real time" >that means something entirely different. In addition, there is nothing "unreal" about other time scales. Likewise, "truetime_t" would incorrectly suggest something "untrue" about the others. >One facet of the >idea is to use IEEE floating-point formats to express time >values. Whatever the desirability of that, is this really >the essential concept? Over the long term, POSIX time_t counts mean solar seconds, though getting into trouble by counting atomic seconds in the short term. This time scale counts atomic seconds over the longer term as well as the short term. As "taitime_t" or "iattime_t" would likely cause howls of outrage (and anyway are not really appropriate), I suggest "atomictime_t", or "atomtime_t". Or maybe "attomtime_t" or just "attotime_t" as a play on "atom" and the FP format. Regards, Mark _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
