Re: [patch] Time fixes for Win32

2001-02-02 Thread Karl Fogel
Ben Collins-Sussman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the the rule is: every fourth year is a leap year, BUT, every century is not; BUT; every fourth century *is* a leap year. We've got two levels of override here. Yep, that's the rule as I've been taught it too.

Re: [patch] Time fixes for Win32

2001-02-01 Thread Cliff Woolley
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +/* Leap year is any year divisible by four, but not by 100 unless also + * divisible by 400 + */ +#define IsLeapYear(y) ((!(y % 4)) ? (((!(y % 400)) (y % 100)) ? 1 : 0) : 0) + If y is divisible evenly by 400, it's automatically divisible by 100... you don't

Re: [patch] Time fixes for Win32

2001-02-01 Thread Ben Collins-Sussman
Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +/* Leap year is any year divisible by four, but not by 100 unless also + * divisible by 400 + */ +#define IsLeapYear(y) ((!(y % 4)) ? (((!(y % 400)) (y % 100)) ? 1 : 0) : 0) + If y is divisible evenly by 400,

Re: [patch] Time fixes for Win32

2001-02-01 Thread Cliff Woolley
--- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If y is divisible evenly by 400, it's automatically divisible by 100... you don't need to check both. =-) That's what I get for talking before I think... I guess you actually DO have to check, since you have to be sure that if it's not divisible