TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Mon, 8 May 2000 00:20:27 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
[log in to unmask] quoted and then wrote:

>By limiting the year range to 1901 .. 2099, Ada sidestepped
>the issue of years evenly divisible by 4 that are not leap
>years. 1900, and 2100 are both evenly divisible by 4, but not
>leap years.

It is possible to change the Ada standard in the forward
direction and require implementors to handle the leap year
math correctly.

It is not possible to change the Ada standard in a uniform
and useful manner in the backward direction because of all
the diversity of how the calendar works according to the
political decisions in various jurisdictions.  There are
11 days missing from 1752, depending on your religion and
citizenship.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2