Re: Leap Year..................!, leap seconds...

Richard Thomas wrote: > > 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 > <snip> We sometimes have leap-seconds but I am not aware of the rule used to invoke them. This would be a real challenge... Meanwhile, those of us in the UK have a mundane and infuriating time problem: the lack of a rule for deciding on the switch to and from summer time (daylight savings to my readers in the USA). It is decided by "Orders in Council". Anyone know the algorithm for this? ;-) -- Peter Lancashire Information Systems Specialist, Bayer plc Eastern Way, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP32 7AH, UK Tel: +44-1635-562258, Fax: +44-1635-562281 --- If all else fails, read the instructions AND the release notes. All opinions are my own and not those of Bayer plc. My Internet plumbing does not allow me to mail and post news together. Sorry. --- Join Infuse, the UK Informix User Group at http://www.infuse.org.uk/