Hi, Paul.

On Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:54:36 -0500, Paul D. Christensen wrote:
|I was just reading some articles in various trade journals.
|I don't know what the copyright rules are on this stuff so I won't
|list exactly what was said, but
|--------
|Micro Focus Compilations (fall 1996) page 15
|Testing for the Year 2000 Compliance by Richard Levy
|Dont forget the leap year - The year 2000 is a leap year .....
|Richard Levy is Testing Manager at Micro Focus Newbury U.K.
|----------
|The 30000 News Wire (Oct 1996) pages 21-22
|The Adager Date Functions: Rx for the Year 2000 Problem
|by John Burke
|Adager flagged Feb 29 2000 as an incorrect date, as the year 2000
|is not a leap year.......
|John Burke is longtime HP3000 columnist....
|----------
|Who's right???

Short answer:  fact.

Simple practical answer:  The LAST time the commonly know (mod 4) leap year
test was inaccurate was in 1900 which was NOT a leap year.  The NEXT time it
will be wrong will be in 2100 which also will NOT be a leap year.

Longer practical answer minus the whys:  February 29 is added in leap years
which are year numbers divisible by 4, except for those divisible by 100
(which are not leap years), with a further exception (to the first exception)
that years divisible by 400 ARE leap years.

For a long answer and interesting pointers to other discussion areas refer
to the hp3000-l archives of several weeks ago.  I would suggest a search for
"leap year" at "http://raven.utc.edu/archives" under the hp3000-l link.
--
Jeff Woods
[log in to unmask] at Unison Software
[log in to unmask]   at home  [PGP key available here via finger]

"'My boy,' he said, 'you are descended from a long line of determined,
  resourceful, microscopic tadpoles -- champions every one.'"
      --  Kurt Vonnegut from "Galapagos"