Another thing about 2000

Subject: Another thing about 2000
From: John Wilcox <wilcox -at- PCD -dot- NET>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 19:42:14 -0800

The addition of an extra day (oops, there's a superfluous modifier) every
four years to correct for the fact that a day is slightly less than 24
hours long results in a tiny overcorrection. So supposedly each year
that is divisible by 400 is NOT supposed to be a leap year. In spite of
this, a zillion programs have been written to use the standard leap year
algorithm. Simply to avoid patching so many programs, I suppose 2000
will indeed be a leap year. Have you heard anything definite?

Previous by Author: Re: Any Web Page Designers Out There?
Next by Author: SoftQuad, Yuri Rubinsky
Previous by Thread: Word Macro Virus
Next by Thread: Re: Another thing about 2000

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads