On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Brooks Harris <[email protected]> wrote:
> As Steve Summit said earlier (with his 2015 example) > > Positive leap second: > > TAI UTC TAI-UTC > 00:00:34.0 23:59:59.0 35 > 00:00:34.5 23:59:59.5 35 > 00:00:35.0 23:59:60.0 35 > 00:00:35.5 23:59:60.5 35 I think these two offsets are wrong. They lead to bad math since 35-35 is 0, but 35-36 is -1 which with borrowing is 60. > 00:00:36.0 00:00:00.0 36 > 00:00:36.5 00:00:00.5 36 > Attached - TAIToUTCDemoConsole - a rudimentary c program using POSIX > gmtime() (a pure, strict gmtime() with 1 second resolution) demonstrates one > way to make the calculations. Its output: > > 2016-2017 Leap Second > TAI seconds YMDhms (TAI) TAI-UTC UTC seconds LS YMDhms (UTC) > 1861920035 = 2017-01-01 00:00:35 - 36 = 1861919999 0 = 2016-12-31 23:59:59 > 1861920036 = 2017-01-01 00:00:36 - 36 = 1861920000 1 = 2016-12-31 23:59:60 > 1861920037 = 2017-01-01 00:00:37 - 37 = 1861920000 0 = 2017-01-01 00:00:00 > 1861920038 = 2017-01-01 00:00:38 - 37 = 1861920001 0 = 2017-01-01 00:00:01 I think the TAI-UTC offset for the leap second is wrong and should be corrected. Warner _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
