Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #24932

Re: simpler increment of time values?

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 5, 10:19 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve
> +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> The number of seconds in a day (true solar day) varies by between 13 and
>> 30 seconds depending on the time of the year and the position of the sun.
>
> Indeed. Which proves that a time keeping system based on the haphazard
> movements of celestial bodies is antiquated technology. Talk about job
> security!

The current *time keeping system* is based atomic clocks. It's only
when you want to display this thing called "civil time" (so-called
because it causes very uncivil arguments) that you concern yourself
with astronomy, base 60, base 24, and other constructs.

Now, if you want to argue about a poor choice of standard, look at
so-called "Internet Time" that a Swiss watch company invented, which
divides a day into 1000 beats. Why use the day as your basis and make
it hard to convert to SI units reliably?

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: simpler increment of time values? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-05 23:56 +1000
  Re: simpler increment of time values? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-05 15:19 +0000
    Re: simpler increment of time values? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2012-07-05 08:39 -0700
      Re: simpler increment of time values? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-06 01:59 +1000
    Re: simpler increment of time values? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-06 01:53 +1000
    Re: simpler increment of time values? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-07-06 00:42 -0400

csiph-web