RE: Leap Year..................!

If 2000 were to have 30 days, surely that would make it a leap leap year (or should that be leap squared ? ;-) In any case, 2000 is a leap year, and February has 29 days. 1900 was not a leap year. For your reference, the rule is: Is the year divisible by 4 ? No - Not a leap year ---> END Yes - Is the year divisible by 100 ? No - It is a leap year ---> END Yes - Is the year divisible by 400 ? No - It is not a leap year Yes - It is a leap year. These convoluted arrangements are required because there are something like 365.2575 days per year, and so a slight correction is required every four hundred years. And even this is not completely correct! Could you imagine what would happen if we introduced a decimal (or even a hexidecimal / octal / binary) calendar? That would make Y2K look like child's play! RET > ---------- > From: Infodata > Reply To: Infodata > Sent: Thursday, 3 September 1998 7:52 PM > To: Informix User Group > Subject: Leap Year..................! > > Dear Informix user, > > I heard that year 2000 is not a leapyear and the February 2000 is > having 30 > days Is Informix is going to solve this problem in the newer versions > or > is it only a Myth? > > regards > > > > >