172
Scientists just voted to redefine how the world keeps time
(www.scientificamerican.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
172 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
88835 readers
3908 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
https://gist.github.com/timvisee/fcda9bbdff88d45cc9061606b4b923ca
If your software is choking on completely expectable events, it it not sufficiently robust.
As you just proved, while it might be possible to write robust software that deals with dates/times, I wouldn't bet on it, and it's Definitely not practical to try.
But you are right that leap seconds were common enough to try and handle. There's a bunch of ways to handle them though, each incompatible with the others.