TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 11:04:30 +1000
Reply-To: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (26 lines)
>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

i would disagree. In the same way that we use GMT as  standard for time, we
should be able to come up with a time based system that underlies the
various views that are needed.

After all, a date that is 30,000 days ago -is- 30,000 days ago, no matter
what calendar is used.

1752's interpretation could then be viewed by using a gregorian calendar
package, or a julian calendar package (i presume this is where the
difference is...).