At 08:29 AM 11/11/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Jim Phillips writes:
>
>>>> Jim Phillips <[log in to unmask]> 11/11/97
>07:27am >>>
>Knowledgable listers:
>
>I thought I had this year 2000 stuff down.  But now I get a letter
>from one of our customers that really confused me.  My understanding
>of the leap year algorithm is:
>
>A year is a leap year if it is evenly divisible by 4, except for
>those years that are evenly divisible by 400.
>
>Is this correct?  Or am I (as usual) deluded?  Is the year 2000
>a leap year or not?
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>Jim you're not deluded, just cold (see e-mail about computer on porch).
>
>The rule is if a year is divisible by 4 and is not evenly divisible
>by 100 it is a leap year.  1896, 1996, 2004 are leap years.  If a year is
>evenly divisible by 100 it is NOT a leap year unless it is also evenly
>divisible by 400.  1800, 1900, 2100 are not leap years, 2000, 2400 are
>leap years.
>
>Mike Berkowitz
>Guess? Inc.
>
the above is true, with one addition...if the year is 3600, it is NOT a
leap year.  I don't know if the rule is "divisible by 3600, or just
3600"...does anyone know?