you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

My point exactly. So the programmer who commented above me is wrong in saying it makes it easier for them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    No, still easier. They are still part of the year, so you can just count them, and the logic is still easier than the mess we currently have. If you really feel the need to you can call new years day the zeroth day in the zeroth month, the day of the week is Holiday, and periodically the zeroth month has one extra Holiday.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Computers store the date as "days after January 1st 1970". So you have a huge number, divide it with 7 and get the day of the week. If there are days that don't belong to any week, you have to calculate January 1st of that year and substrate it in addition to the steps above. I don't say it's not manageable, but it's not easier

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They store the number of seconds since the epoch of 1970, but you're always going to have leap days and even leap seconds. Even if you changed the definition of a second to match the current length of a year, it would be off again relatively soon and you'd need leap seconds again. It's NEVER going to be as simple as you seem to think it should be. Chaos and complexity is inherent in the whole system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I never said it was simple. The comment above me was "oh, this makes it much easier" and I was like "it's not really getting easier". That's all I said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments