Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #24932
| Path | csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <rosuav@gmail.com> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.153 |
| X-Spam-Level | * |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 0.69; '*S*': 0.00; '24,': 0.16; '60,': 0.16; 'constructs.': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'subject:values': 0.16; 'time"': 0.16; 'varies': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'received:209.85.214.174': 0.21; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'am,': 0.27; 'technology.': 0.27; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'argue': 0.29; 'concern': 0.29; "d'aprano": 0.29; 'so-called': 0.29; 'steven': 0.29; 'convert': 0.29; 'fri,': 0.30; 'seconds': 0.30; 'johnson': 0.32; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.34; 'subject:?': 0.35; 'received:209.85': 0.35; 'display': 0.36; 'why': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'talk': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:209.85.214': 0.39; 'called': 0.39; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'your': 0.60; 'company': 0.60; 'between': 0.63; 'jul': 0.65; 'bodies': 0.71; 'swiss': 0.71; 'day': 0.73; 'yourself': 0.77; 'astronomy,': 0.84; 'proves': 0.84; 'solar': 0.84; 'rick': 0.91 |
| DKIM-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=G2rpDvMZsAGAgZQxUGAMGTb/7u8GRI++Ohzx79jvoac=; b=l1nky8o23kzIcYHiGW6FhAUdi5kBbLnVTwOHapDdFIgD+ZVOXXZSDDmZ65qDDwDFhn Wx8IQgSXwb2DFXtf/PdztttSJ6tSlf4jStujGgHPvohNsSO1X+ULD9rnXnkormRQ/jMn eDeEuQFZXmtX3PIcyShfRicAPjWeGE+2MiDPoQh0BKwDqVEgancBwobQ3Xyd2jkjLG3Y cXV6A7mHFYgGICELjqaWwRKIPDk9BPwYbt+SYSw9e9WIDi+6tHsPoRvuOrr17GVSzBS7 vkvGGWQ88CRQuTk1SJi1T0RjGilBq5pE6uEts7E8WNb3/Xz7AkLVr6V8ozcnqveDjMgP nJ6w== |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To | <d30c7f28-90d3-497a-b1e7-1fe5eb5c1de6@g5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> |
| References | <CAHzaPEO5D498zepGC0EVVURdUE7qxYJk6ksd5yS_Xj_hh5iiyQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHzaPEMKGbUPhpfaB5bFkxJkMsmHrCzPZojYB7ZVO2r8P0MGAg@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.1823.1341496599.4697.python-list@python.org> <4ff5b086$0$29988$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <d30c7f28-90d3-497a-b1e7-1fe5eb5c1de6@g5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> |
| Date | Fri, 6 Jul 2012 01:59:19 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: simpler increment of time values? |
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
| To | python-list@python.org |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.12 |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1836.1341503967.4697.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 22 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1341503967 news.xs4all.nl 6911 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:53070 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.python:24932 |
Show key headers only | 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
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