On Fri, 21 May 2004, Ordak D. Coward wrote: > I was looking at Omid K. Rad's implementation of calendar, and have a > few comments on calculating leap years.
Thank you ODC for evaluating my code. > 1. The implemented algorithm uses a 128 year period, although the > comments say it uses a 2820 year period. While I need to ask for this > discrepancy be resolved, it is important to understand that the 128 > year period and the 2820 year period only differ once every 2820 > years. In other words, the current implementation does not differ from > the 2820 year method until year 3294 A.P (or H.S.). [...] Ofcouse, when I wrote that calendar, I was not sure about a formula that I can rely on for 2820-year cycles: 21 x (29 + 33 + 33 + 33) + (29 + 33 + 33 + 37) Once I tried to implement it using iterations to compare the results, but it was a huge failure in performance as expected. If I give any future releases I'll change the formula for sure, but let's first agree on the method to calculate leap years. From a developer's point of view, I don't see me qualified enough to choose a cerain algorithm now. Thanks again for commenting. Omid P.S: For those who want to see the code, you can download it from here: http://www.gotdotnet.com/Community/UserSamples/Details.aspx?SampleGuid=8 44E1A97-0E12-48D7-B2F9-D5884A9B1523 This is the code that was proposed to Microsoft two years ago. _______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
