RE: Feb 29, 2000

[Joel Fritz <JFritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Seems to me the rule is (i'm missing one finer exception, though):
Year is a leap year if it is divisible by 4 unless it's a multiple of 100
that's not also divisible by 400.  2000 qualifies, but 1900 doesn't by this
rule.  Just checked it using a test program I wrote when I was experimenting
with date data type operations and it seems to work that way.  The program
doesn't handle invalid date entry on the screen too gracefully, though. <g> 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Teff [mailto:jteff19@idt.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 9:25 AM
> To: Midrange Dot Com
> Subject: Feb 29, 2000
> 
> 
> I thought the leap year rule stated that any year evenly divisible
> by 4 was a leap year unless it was also evenly divisible by 400
> and then it wasn't. That would make 1700, 1800 and 1900 leap
> years, but 2000 wouldn't be. Yet everywhere I look, it shows a
> Feb 29th in 2000 (calendars, PIM software, OS/400 date data
> types, etc). I seem remember a thread on this list a while back
> and it was stated that 2000 wasn't a leap year. Can anyone set
> me straight here.
> 
> Joe Teff
> 
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: 
> david@midrange.com
> +---
> 
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---