Re: More off-topic nonesense

From: "Rob Harper" <stateofmind@breathemail.net>

Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000

Ken Mulholland wrote...
> Today's leap year day is slightly unusual since most centenial years
> are not a leap year with the exception of those that divide evenly by
> 400 - hence leap year day today. The last time this happened was in
> 1600 - before the days of S. Pepys!
> A further exception to all this is the fact that the year 3600 will not
> be a leap year - see you then!

Anecdotal evidence suggests that there are plenty of computer systems
out there that do not realise that this is a leap year, and screw
things up appropriately.  If this is true, it makes me wonder about
the competence of the programmers: if you assume all centennial years
are leap years, you will have another 100 years before being proven
wrong, whereas the other way around you have to wait 100 years before
being *right*.  Unless, of course, the program was written before 1900.

--
Rob
--------------------------------------------------
State of Mind [Ten Years On and still None The Wiser]
Time on your hands?  Wondering who I am?
Take a look at: http://users.breathemail.net/stateofmind/

References

More off-topic nonesense
Ken Mulholland <Ken@timepatternspbm.demon.co.uk>
Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000