
> > ... then trailing zeros are hacked out,
> > two digits at a time.
> 
> I was wondering why it seemed to always want to produce an even number
> of fractional digits.  Why are you doing it 2 at a time and not 1?
> I should think timestamp(1) would produce 1 fractional digit, not
> two digits of which the second is always 0 ...

Yup, same here. I'd also prefer 1 at a time.
If you want compatibility, I would do it only for the first 2 digits.

Andreas

Fri, 5 Oct 2001 09:59:43 +0200
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>
Re: Timestamp, fractional seconds problem 