From: fred AT genesis DOT demon DOT co DOT uk (Lawrence Kirby)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: having trouble with long numbers
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 97 00:53:37 GMT
Organization: none
Message-ID: <870396817snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>
References: <01bc9c51$0ceeec80$78ed1fcc AT darkstar> <01bc9c58$5796ffa0$b361e426 AT DCorbit DOT solutionsiq DOT com> <33DFD749 DOT 2AD2 AT ici DOT net>
Reply-To: fred AT genesis DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Lines: 16
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

In article <33DFD749 DOT 2AD2 AT ici DOT net>
           carla AT ici DOT net "Alicia Carla Longstreet" writes:

>It is a bit closer to 365.246  (Which is why we do NOT have a leap year
>on years that are divisable by 400.

Years divisible by 400 are leap years (which is why 2000 is a leap year).
It is years divisible by 100 (other than those divisible by 400) that are
not leap years.

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Lawrence Kirby | fred AT genesis DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Wilts, England | 70734 DOT 126 AT compuserve DOT com
-----------------------------------------