Messages in this thread | | | From | "Helge Hafting" <> | Date | Fri, 18 Sep 1998 10:34:15 +0100 | Subject | Re: Non-urgent issue with fs/isofs/util.c |
| |
In <19980918151457.C9740@harvestroad.com.au>, on 09/18/98 at 03:14 PM, Ian McKellar <imckellar@harvestroad.com.au> said:
>Hi,
>The iso_date function in fs/isofs/util.c doesn't correctly handle leap >years.
>Well, it doesn't handle the year 2100 - which according to the code is a >leap year, but according to the commonly accepted rules is not.
>I don't think we need to be to concerned right now, but changing: > if (((year+2) % 4) == 0 && month > 2) >to: > if (((year+2) % 4) == 0 && month > 2 && year != 130) should >fix it. The equivalent code if (!((year+2) & 3) && month > 2 && year != 130) is probably faster. The somewhat expensive mod operator is replaced by a bitwise "and", that is faster on most platforms.
Helge Hafting -- ----------------------------------------------------------- helge.hafting@daldata.no -----------------------------------------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |