Re: Feb 29, 2000

[leif@xxxxxxx]

other way around:

1700, 1800, 1900 were not leap years but 2000 will be

----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Teff <jteff19@idt.net>
To: Midrange Dot Com <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:25 AM
Subject: Feb 29, 2000


> I thought the leap year rule stated that any year evenly divisible
> by 4 was a leap year unless it was also evenly divisible by 400
> and then it wasn't. That would make 1700, 1800 and 1900 leap
> years, but 2000 wouldn't be. Yet everywhere I look, it shows a
> Feb 29th in 2000 (calendars, PIM software, OS/400 date data
> types, etc). I seem remember a thread on this list a while back
> and it was stated that 2000 wasn't a leap year. Can anyone set
> me straight here.
>
> Joe Teff
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
> +---
>

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---