Re: Y2K

James H. Cloos Jr. (cloos@jhcloos.com)
23 Jun 1998 21:32:09 -0500


>>>>> "Peter" == Peter T Breuer <ptb@it.uc3m.es> writes:

Peter> I'm a little worried about year 2K. They seem to count it as a
Peter> leap year. Is that correct? I thought it was |4, except for
Peter> |100, except for |400, but I don't know the approximation after
Peter> that.

There is no more after that.

Peter> As I recall this has been hashed over several times in
Peter> year 2K groups,

and many other groups besides.... :(

Peter> and the conclusion ws that school texts are
Peter> usually wrong, and the american constitution definitely is. Or
Peter> vice versa (on this issue).

I never saw a text that got it wrong -- they all had it essentially
just like you wrote it, though were perhaps a bit more verbose. :)

And neither the constitution itself, nor any of its amendments mention
leap year formulae (confirmed w/ a grep(1) for the regex 'four|leap').
(Cf. <URL:http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/const.html>
<URL:http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/bor.html>
<URL:http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/amend.html>)

-JimC

-- 
James H. Cloos, Jr.
<cloos@jhcloos.com>

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu