# Higher resolution DateTime/TimeStamp

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/higher-resolution-datetime-timestamp/3069>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Tags:** dates\
**Created:** [April 5, 2017, 3:54pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/higher-resolution-datetime-timestamp/3069 "2017-04-05T15:54:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 19

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2017, 10:34am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/higher-resolution-datetime-timestamp/3069/19 "2017-05-17T10:34:02Z")

</div>

> [@c42f](#):
>
> This is in contrast to Base, where last I looked a second was a somewhat ambiguously defined UT second (not the UTC realization of UT though, as DateTime can’t represent leap seconds).

Nothing ambiguous about it: Base’s time is in [UT1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Time#Versions), modulo time zones (which are a whole other can of worms). This is in contrast to many other language’s time systems which claim to be in UTC and then ignore leap seconds – which is contradictory, not just ambiguous.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/higher-resolution-datetime-timestamp/3069)._