From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,814bd9dd1692da42
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Dale Stanbrough <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Calling C time function from ADA-95
Date: 1998/06/08
Message-ID: <6lhnan$1vi$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 360816480
Distribution: world
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <3579da75.13533758@enews.newsguy.com>
 <357C141E.D868661F@earthling.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-XXMessage-ID: <B1A29DE20E011B17@obibicut.cs.rmit.edu.au>
Organization: RMIT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-06-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Charles Hixson  writes:

"Well, since you asked, the year type of Calendar has a **much** too
 restricted range.  Saving space by restricting the size of the year that
 way reminds me of all of the programs that stored only two digits for
 their year in the '60s, and now their descendants are delighting
 everyone."


I always thought the range was chosen to allow for fast leap year 
calculations (year mod 4, excluding the more expensive mod 100/mod 400)
rather than to save space. Does anyone have any better knowledge?

Dale