| ??? 05/26/11 07:47 Read: times |
#182400 - ARGH>>> You must assign a subject to your message, please... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Neil said:
Another "sanity check" is that the data is in a valid range: If you started this project on, say, 1 May 2011, then anythiny before that date cannot possibly be good - and must require the time to be re set. That could be a good idea in many cases. There are however probably just as many cases where this is not the correct thing to do. I've had products that do things based on the clock information and there may be times when the product wants to be used in a way that it executes the algorithm for a different date. Another thing is that if you lock out the time span from 1 Jan 00 to 1 May 11 you may prevent the product from being possibly demonstrated in a museum after 31 Dec 99. (ignoring the fact that most current RTCs do not comprehend the special requirements for lack of a leap year in 2100). The subject of RTCs brings up another thing too...despite what we all went through in the Y2K transition we still have RTC chips that support year counting from 00 to 99. Some chips now have a "century" register that can be used to hold the upper two digits of the year number but these registers often do not support increment from the overflow of the Year register from 99 back to 00. Michael Karas |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| DS1307 initialization | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's simple, really | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Simple really | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What I Do With RTC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sanity check | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ARGH>>> You must assign a subject to your message, please... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Indeed. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Broken Time Representations | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Very many break years in circulation for 2-digit years | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| occasionally the government ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nice strategy! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Write Date Values Once! | 01/01/70 00:00 |