Re: Y2k compliance

Benny Amorsen (
05 Dec 1998 12:23:12 +0100

>>>>> "MJ" == Myreen Johan <> writes:

MJ> I don't understand the fuzz about year 2000 being a leap year.


MJ> Do do you really expect to find programs out there written by
MJ> programmers informed enough to take into account that years
MJ> divisible by 100 are not leap years, but *at* *the* *same* *time*
MJ> don't know that years divisible by 400 are leap years after all?

MJ> Has anybody ever bumped into this problem in real life? I suspect
MJ> this "problem" is just the product of the Y2K consultants'
MJ> imagination.

I have seen it in real life.

Everyone knows that years divisible by 4 are leap years. A lot know
that there are exceptions. Fewer know that there are two exceptions.

I thought the way you did when I first heard of the problem, but I
have been forced to reconsider. There really are programs out there
that think year 2000 is not a leap year.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at