137: Current-seconds semantics still open

In issue #70, WG1 voted to make current-seconds an optional procedure, but there is no guidance about what it returns. The second choice, TimeCowan, calls it current-posix-second and makes it return the integral number of seconds since the Posix epoch, excluding all leap seconds. We need a final decision on name and semantics.

cowan

2011-02-03 05:11:23

descriptionIn issue #70, WG1 voted to make current-seconds an optional procedure, but there is no guidance about what it returns. The second choice, cowan, calls it (current-posix-second) and makes it return the number of seconds since the Posix epoch, excluding all leap seconds. We need a final decision on semantics.In issue #70, WG1 voted to make current-seconds an optional procedure, but there is no guidance about what it returns. The second choice, TimeCowan, calls it (current-posix-second) and makes it return the number of seconds since the Posix epoch, excluding all leap seconds. We need a final decision on semantics.

cowan

2011-02-03 05:13:31

descriptionIn issue #70, WG1 voted to make current-seconds an optional procedure, but there is no guidance about what it returns. The second choice, TimeCowan, calls it (current-posix-second) and makes it return the number of seconds since the Posix epoch, excluding all leap seconds. We need a final decision on semantics.In issue #70, WG1 voted to make `current-seconds` an optional procedure, but there is no guidance about what it returns. The second choice, TimeCowan, calls it `current-posix-second` and makes it return the integral number of seconds since the Posix epoch, excluding all leap seconds. We need a final decision on name and semantics.

alexshinn

2011-07-10 18:06:15

resolution␣␣

statusnewdecided

We voted to return TAI time as an inexact value.

cowan

2011-07-11 13:41:36

owneralexshinncowan

statusdecidedwriting

cowan

2012-10-05 06:33:37

resolution␣fixed

statuswritingclosed

Modified by #358.

Ticket 137: Current-seconds semantics still open