10 Jun
2005
10 Jun
'05
5:29 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
Jerome Fine replies:
Concept is correct, but again the implementation is
a bit different. I think the rule is to subtract 28
years. I can't remember if the 28 is correct, but
a test case provided the same day of the week.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
Paul Koning wrote:
Y2K isn't an issue -- if that breaks things,
simply set the system
time to 1999.
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Doc Shipley wrote: Or, if you want to be picky with it, most
computers not Y2K-compliant
will accept either 1988 or 1994. That gives you the correct day-of-week.
Right concept, but 1988 is a leap year, and neither 1994 nor 2005 are.