Re: No panic - but .. Y2K + 4

From: Howard Brazee (howard_at_brazee.net)
Date: 01/07/04 

Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:50:01 GMT

On 6-Jan-2004, IanDalziel@lineone.net (Ian Dalziel) wrote:

> > My original point was that I could imagine (in
> > my NIGHTMARES) someone putting in a rule to "correctly" handle 2000 - but
> > messing up 2004 (and 1996 and all other "normal" leap years).
>
> How? 2000 is divisible by four, exactly like the others.

It's not likely - but I have seen dumber code.

This bug may exist somewhere - but there are bugs all over the place being
discovered all the time.