On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:39:38 -0400, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> wrote:
>
> I have added this comment above the DAYS_PER_MONTH macro:
>
> + /*
> + * DAYS_PER_MONTH is very imprecise. The more accurate value is
> + * 365.25/12 = 30.4375, or '30 days 10:30:00'. Right now we only
> + * return an integral number of days, but someday perhaps we should
> + * also return a 'time' value to be used as well.
> + */
> #define DAYS_PER_MONTH 30 /* assumes exactly 30 days per month */
>
> Let me add that we could actually do this in many places now because we
> are already converting to 'time' in those places. Is this a TODO?
Shouldn't you be using 365.2425/12 (30.436875) for the number of days per
month?
