mxTools (was Re: why no "do : until"?)

[Robin Becker]

In article <93hg4a0144i at news2.newsguy.com>, Alex Martelli
<aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes
>"A.M. Kuchling" <amk at mira.erols.com> wrote in message
>news:slrn95nml8.ij.amk at 207-172-69-8.s262.tnt8.brd.va.dialup.rcn.com...
>> >There are a potentially infinite number of types/classes/modules which
>> >can be considered as essential if they are required for consistency in
>> >more than one other module.
>>
>> In addition, many modules release new revisions much faster than
>> Python does.  For example, I consider adding the XML parsing modules
>> to 2.0 to now have been demonstrated to be a serious mistake; there
>
>Nolo contendere on either the general contention or the specific
>case of XML -- thus, prudence is well warranted; modules should
>not be added unless (among other things) proved solid & stable.
>
>But doesn't mxDateTime meet this important requirement, as well
>as the one about general foundational importance?
>
>
>Alex
I point out that there are several competing binary time formats
including the fairly ludicrous M$/Lotus 1900 is a leap year one. None of
the 64bit ones has a hope of surviving too long in a world where
nano/pico seconds are becoming important.

Presumably in Astronomical circles people do actually take account of
the leap seconds that real time keepers periodically intercalate. I hear
that Astronomers like Python, so are there any real timekeeper
preferences out there and what do they think?
-- 
Robin Becker