On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:32:42 -0500 Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> The word "solar" does not appear on > http://sqlite.org/lang_datefunc.html . Instead it's explicitly stated > that "Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) is used". Quite. > Still, ISTM that "UTC is used" implies handling of leap seconds, and > the simplest way to handle them is to parse them but alias them to a > neighboring second. That wouldn't be a step forward. If you want to handle leap seconds, you can't do it by igoring them. If you simply accept 60 seconds to mean the next minute, you won't have helped the leap-second crowd at all, and you *will* have permitted erroneous input in many, many cases. ISTM we're speculating here. In 10 years, has anyone posted a message to this list explaining why his leap-seconds can't be represented in SQLite? I mean, there have been 3 such events in that time, surely enough to trip someone up. (http://maia.usno.navy.mil/ser7/tai-utc.dat) For those following along at home, iIf you don't think the relationship between UTC and the readout you're apt to see in your system logs is ambiguous at best, see http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/leap.html. > Raising errors is not that useful here: most users who ever run into > such timestamps will not really know what to do with them. I think you're quite wrong here. Until presented with evidence to the contrary, I would assert the opposite: that users who run into leap seconds *do* know what to do with them because they need to, for astronomical reasons or somesuch. And have already done so. --jkl _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
