The leap year is one case, but there is more: eastern, ISO week
numbers etc. that are often needed. My experience goes to the 1980's
when I found an APL function DATUM. It did great job many years until
it did wrong somewhere after 1990. The conclusion is that no
programmer has the time to carefully check the algorithm over many
future years. Writers of Calendrical Tabulations have done the job
seriously and professionally and therefore I trust on them. When I
use calendrical information in my applications I allways check it
with published calendars.
Anssi
At 02:21 30.12.2006, you wrote:
Are there any particular examples how this book is
more precise than following the mentioned formula,
or using the dates script.
--- Anssi Seppälä <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My experience is that the APL/J calendrical algorithms are allways
> unreliable. The testing is allways insufficient. My choice was to buy
> Reingold&Dershowiz: Calendrical Tabulations 1900 - 2200. There I find
> reliable data and put that into the applications.
> Anssi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
