Re: RE:DML Y2K (non-Dak)

From: Gordon Thomas Adams (gta0001@jove.acs.unt.edu)
Date: Thu Jan 07 1999 - 10:56:06 EST


That could still potentially cause some minor problems because not all
programs, especially rapidly devloped programs by some less experienced
consultants may not be checking for that.

Besides, I don't understand what everyone is worried about, isn't year
2000 the end of the World???

hehehe

later
Gordon
99 R/T rc black

On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, JT McBride wrote:

> >Of course the leap year is a problem as well, every four years we have a
> >leap year, well we also have a leap year every thousand years, the year 2000
> >has two leap years right on each other so they cancel each other out and it
> >will not be a leap year, but if you look at older calanders you will see
> >that they have it beeing a leap year based of the every 4 year theory.
>
> Wrong Brian. The leap year rule is every four years, except century years
> (ending in 00), except if the year can be divided by 400, in which case it
> IS a leap year. Check your calendars. There IS a February 29th, 2000.
>
> Jim
> ´93 4x4 CC V8
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:53 EDT