On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 01:48:35PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:42:49 +0100
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Why? POSIX says 2000 is not a leap year :)
>
> What makes you say that?
I read something along those lines somewhere..
> POSIX is incorrect because it says that 2100 is a leap year (just in
> case you were worried that there wouldn't be a Y2.1K problem). POSIX
> does not say that 2000 is not a leap year.
Ah.. then that was the problem :)
> Here is the conversion rule that POSIX specifies:
>
> time_t == tm_sec + tm_min * 60 + tm_hour * 3600 + tm_yday * 86400
> + (tm_year - 70) * 31536000 + ((tm_year - 69) / 4) * 86400
Kewl.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
