|
This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. |
1
2
|
Zune |
TestSubject
Member #8,989
August 2007
|
I was just assuming that year was going to be the year listed on the Zune, not the thing about origin year. And leap years are every four years...aren't they?
|
Roy Underthump
Member #10,398
November 2008
|
Leap years are every 4 years, except when the last two digits are 00, except for the years evenly divisible by 400. So 1900 was not a leap year (since it was divisible by 100 but not 400) and 2000 was a leap year. I love America -- I love the rights we used to have |
TestSubject
Member #8,989
August 2007
|
Seriously? That seems really weird. Is that because there is like 0.24 extra days per year so some leap years need to be skipped? Wait so are all years divisible by 400 not leap years, or years ending in 00 that are divisible be zero are leap years? So:
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
Edit. Beaten and not 100% correct. Every four years, except on the 100th year, except on the 400th year. 1896 yes, 4th year |
Roy Underthump
Member #10,398
November 2008
|
I love America -- I love the rights we used to have |
TestSubject
Member #8,989
August 2007
|
Wow, two posts while I was writing my one. That's pretty interesting. Too bad I probably won't live to see a non-leap-divisible-by-four-year. Although I guess that actually wouldn't be interesting at all... Future me said: Hey wow, there's no February 29!
Future descendants said: Shut up, why the hell would anyone care about that at all
|
bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
|
Thomas Harte said: I think they do, at least to the extent that single quotes in a heading like that just look like someone meant to use double quotes and messed up. I regularly see single and double quotes used interchangeably and think nothing of it. I still fail to see your point. I generally prefer to use double-quotes for things like actual quotes or irony, and use single-quotes for things that don't justify double-quotes. TestSubject said: And leap years are every four years...aren't they? The Wikipedia article explains the rules correctly and easily (the algorithm part has pseudocode). -- acc.js | al4anim - Allegro 4 Animation library | Allegro 5 VS/NuGet Guide | Allegro.cc Mockup | Allegro.cc <code> Tag | Allegro 4 Timer Example (w/ Semaphores) | Allegro 5 "Winpkg" (MSVC readme) | Bambot | Blog | C++ STL Container Flowchart | Castopulence Software | Check Return Values | Derail? | Is This A Discussion? Flow Chart | Filesystem Hierarchy Standard | Clean Code Talks - Global State and Singletons | How To Use Header Files | GNU/Linux (Debian, Fedora, Gentoo) | rot (rot13, rot47, rotN) | Streaming |
Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
|
Quote: I regularly see single and double quotes used interchangeably and think nothing of it. I still fair to see your point. I generally prefer to use double-quotes for things like actual quotes or irony, and use single-quotes for things that don't justify double-quotes. The fact that you use quotes incorrectly (at least as per British English, where the BBC is located) isn't really relevant — the BBC News site is written by actual, trained journalists with subeditors and editors, so you can expect them to use quotes correctly. I'm not even really sure why you think it is relevant. So my point is exactly what I've said it is, even though you disagree, i.e.: Thomas Harte said:
maybe 2008 was the year that, per the BBC, the software meaning of bug stopped being recognised by mainstream society? Again: I think mainstream society knows what a bug is. I am therefore surprised that the BBC suddenly think they do not. Given the wide knowledge of the meaning of the term, I'd go so far as to say that the BBC's use of single quotes looks almost like they meant it to be a quote but for the fact that single quotes aren't used for direct quotes like that. However, as I've previously said, it is obvious from the article itself that they have used single quotes correctly and simply believe that people do not know what a bug is. [My site] [Tetrominoes] |
Roy Underthump
Member #10,398
November 2008
|
I seen a post in techdirt that mentioned that an MP3 player shouldn't need the date at all, so it must be some sort of DRM that needed to know what the date is. I love America -- I love the rights we used to have |
TestSubject
Member #8,989
August 2007
|
The sharing thing has a deadline of three days, so that might be why it needs the date. I read that it connects to the super Microsoft hivemind in the sky, and attempting to tamper with the date yourself is certain death.
|
CGamesPlay
Member #2,559
July 2002
|
It also might be because the device has a clock. -- Ryan Patterson - <http://cgamesplay.com/> |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Quote: I seen a post in techdirt that mentioned that an MP3 player shouldn't need the date at all, so it must be some sort of DRM that needed to know what the date is. I can't think of any good reason why a fridge needs to know the time either, but I've seen them come with clocks anyway. For that matter, your microwave doesn't need to know the time either. Nor does my mom's oven. My Cowon has a built-in calendar. Not that I use it, but it wants to know the date and time because of that. |
|
1
2
|