On Thu 2003-07-03T18:30:00 +0100, Markus Kuhn hath writ:
Thanks for pointing this out! Weekday-continuity is indeed a bit of a
problem of this approach. I can't see any other practical solution than
skipping one weekday together with the skipped 29 February 5600, in
other words, 5600-03-01
Title: RE: [LEAPSECS] making leap hours workable
I believe you would get very strong pushback from the POSIX world if you tried to make the time base TAI rather than UTC. Without a strong case for this change (which I haven't seen yet), I would be one of them.
/glen
-Original
Title: RE: [LEAPSECS] making leap hours workable
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: July 2, 2003 4:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] making leap hours workable
The second reality is that many existing applications