[Numpy-discussion] timezones and datetime64
Charles R Harris
charlesr.harris at gmail.com
Thu Apr 4 13:06:43 EDT 2013
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
chris.barker at noaa.gov> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Mark Wiebe <mwwiebe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Pauli Virtanen <pav at iki.fi> wrote:
> >> Probably also TAI and UTC/Posix.
> >> Converting from one format to the other is problematic since
> >> all of them (except TAI afaik) require looking things up in
> >> regularly updated databases. Not only restricted to conversions,
> >> but also arithmetic, `b - a`. Affects also UTC/Posix via leap
> >> seconds --- this probably doesn't usually matter, but if we want
> >> to be strict, it's not good to ignore the issue.
> > I think this would be nice. Would it be a stretch to extend the ISO
> > with '2013-02-02T03:00:00TAI'?
> Is there no standard for that already -- it's not mentioned in
> ISO_8601, but maybe there is something else.
> > One problem with trying to give technically correct answers for the
> > UTC/Posix format is that it can't actually represent the leap-second, so
> > datetime64 + timedelta64 could produce an unrepresentable moment in time.
> I'm a bit confused by that -- how it it different than leap-days?
There is a rule for leap days, one knows ahead of time when they will occur.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion