Re: why 1904? ms excel

Article View: comp.sys.mac

Article #4209

#4209

From: Geoff Allen
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1989 21:04

15 lines
1047 bytes

In article <8909061947.AA00416@vs04csc.UMD.EDU> russotto@wam.UMD.EDU writes:
>There is an easier leap year rule for dates
>starting in 1904 and going to a date < 2100.  That is, for those
>dates, a leap year is any year divisible by 4.  If you include 1900,
>a leap year is any year divisible by four that is either not divisible
>by 100, or is divisible by 400.

OK, so why start with 1904?

Why not 1901?

-- 
Geoff Allen - WINCO Computer Process Engineering
{uunet,bigtex}!pmafire!geoff <or> ucdavis!egg-id!pmafire!geoff 
Disclaimer:  WINCO doesn't believe in Macs, so of course these are my views.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <746@pmafire.UUCP>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!bigtex!pmafire!geoff

References: <457a7553.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> <8909061947.AA00416@vs04csc.UMD.EDU>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!bigtex!pmafire!geoff
From: geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: why 1904?  ms excel
Message-ID: <746@pmafire.UUCP>
Date: 7 Sep 89 21:04:15 GMT
References: <457a7553.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> <8909061947.AA00416@vs04csc.UMD.EDU>
Reply-To: geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen)
Organization: WINCO, INEL, Idaho
Lines: 15

Reply to Parent Message