[LEAPSECS] presentations from AAS Future of Time sessions

[Eric R. Smith]

On 2014-01-18 06:56, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <52DA2A0F.9060704 at rubidium.dyndns.org>, Magnus Danielson writes:

> 

>> If you where right about not basing it on the orbital debris, then we 

>> should not attempt to be using concepts like seconds, minutes, hours, 

>> days, weeks, months, years [...]

> 

> As you are no doubt aware, the POSIX time_t does not do that.

> 


Doesn't it? If POSIX time_t were in fact a count of SI seconds since the
epoch then the nature of the "leap second problem" would be quite
different. time_t uses at least the concept of "day". I think actually
that's the fundamental problem with time_t -- it presents itself as a
count of elapsed time but is in fact a funny representation of civil
time (days, minutes, hours, etc.) instead.