I just noticed that I had accidentally reverted this change in the patch:
> /*
> * Note: the point of adding 4800 is to ensure we make the same
> * assumptions as Postgres' Julian-date routines about the placement of
> * leap years in centuries BC, at least back to 4713BC which is as far as
> * we'll go. This is effectively extending Gregorian timekeeping into
> * pre-Gregorian centuries, which is a tad bogus but it conforms to the
> * SQL spec...
> */
> #define LEAPS_THRU_END_OF(y) (((y) + 4800) / 4 - ((y) + 4800) / 100 + ((y) + 4800) / 400)
vs original in tzcode2003e:
> #define LEAPS_THRU_END_OF(y) ((y) / 4 - (y) / 100 + (y) / 400)
Looking closer, I don't understand how that change was supposed to do
anything. If I'm doing my math right, our +4800 version of the code can
be written as: "y/4 - y/100 - y/400 + 1164". The only place this macro
is used is this:
> days -= ((int64) (newy - y)) * DAYSPERNYEAR +
> LEAPS_THRU_END_OF(newy - 1) -
> LEAPS_THRU_END_OF(y - 1);
AFAICS, the constant " + 1164" is always cancelled out, making the
exercise of adding 4800 a waste of time.
Am I missing something?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
