Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!jethro!Sun.COM!acm
From: acm@Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: Leap year function
Message-ID: <4183@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
Date: 23 May 91 23:22:15 GMT
References: <8BF621w164w@kaiki.toppoint.de> <JPRD34w164w@allanon.UUCP>
Sender: news@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM
Reply-To: acm@Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View CA
Lines: 18

In article <JPRD34w164w@allanon.UUCP>, marcos@allanon.UUCP (Marcos Della) writes:
> how about changing it to the following:
> 
>    leap_year := (year MOD 4 = 0) AND
>                 ((year MOD 100 <> 0) OR (year MOD 400 = 0));
> 
> That should clear up the hundred and four hundred year problem...

But it *doesn't* clear up the 1722 problem.  (In 1722, eleven days were
dropped out of the month of September.)

I guess you could call 1722 a super duper negative leap year, that is in
regular leap years one day is added.  In a sdn leap year eleven days
are dropped.

It's a pity that they didn't drop them from February.

						Andrew MacRae