Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!etive!hwcs!zen!frank
From: frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Updates to K&R 2
Message-ID: <1589@zen.co.uk>
Date: 7 Jun 89 15:46:10 GMT
References: <4392e156.19050@apollo.COM> <1110@osf.OSF.ORG> <10360@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Reply-To: frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales)
Organization: Zengrange Limited, Leeds, England
Lines: 14

In article <10360@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>In article <1110@osf.OSF.ORG> dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) writes:
>>I thought that only one leap second would be added at a time (only one
>>per minute, at any rate).  Shouldn't these be (0,60), then?
>It may well be that (0,60) is always sufficient, but the standard allows
>for (0,61).  X3J11 received conflicting information about this.

I seem to remember that a couple of years ago, the occasional end-of-year
correction was two leap seconds, and this was mentioned in some science-type
rag (Omni, I think) as being exceptional, but not unprecedented.
So the 0..61 range would seem justified.
--
Frank Wales, Systems Manager,        [frank@zen.co.uk<->mcvax!zen.co.uk!frank]
Zengrange Ltd., Greenfield Rd., Leeds, ENGLAND, LS9 8DB. (+44) 532 489048 x217