Sorry -- seems I forgot what the "divisible-by-400" rule was
an exception _to_. It's been awhile since that whole panic.
PA
PMA wrote:
Just in case, 2000 (divisible by 400) isn't a leap
year either, though my Linux 'cal' claims it was.
PA
Linda Alvord wrote:
Don, You bailed me out of this little glitch! Linda i U
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Kelly
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 10:14 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Weekend Puzzle - Age of Groundhog born
2002 2 2
Fortunately, the use of "leap" is valid as long as one doesn't go back
past 1901 or ahead past 2099.
1900 and 2100 aren't leap years (Fine tuning of the leap year
calculation ).
Don Kelly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
