Portable general timestamp format, not 2038-limited

James Harris james.harris.1 at googlemail.com
Thu Jul 5 01:04:10 CEST 2007


On 4 Jul, 22:18, "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usen... at hjp.at> wrote:
...
> But it really doesn't matter much. If you ignore leap seconds, using
> days instead of seconds is just a constant factor (in fact, the unix
> timestamp ignores leap seconds, too, so it's always a constant factor).
> You can't represent a second exactly if the unit is one day (1/86400 is
> not a multiple of a power of two), but that probably doesn't matter.

Sure. However, the proposal was to define ticks as 25 microseconds.




More information about the Python-list mailing list