Very smart!

• ###### ReD_HeaDeDcommented on "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

understood the mistake
of the julian calendar year % 100 != 0 - superfluous
really don't understand why...

• ###### ReD_HeaDeDcommented on "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

Hello my code passes tests with years > 1752
and where < 1752 are lost for several days (1, 3 ... somewhere around 10)
in tests, the rule of the julian calendar?
(year % 4 == 0) and (year % 100 != 0) ?
Or am I misunderstanding something, please tell me

• ###### kharoubi abderrahmencommented on "Snail" cpp solution

i would like at some time in The Future whith god help to be able to come with this kind of simple solutions

• ###### trashy_incelcreated a suggestion for "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

there was no year `0` in either the Gregorian and the Julian calendar. the years go from `-1 BC` (before Christ) to `+1 AD` (anno Domini). I would suggest removing the mention of year `0` in the description, and updating the random tests accordingly

fixed

• ###### trashy_incelcreated an issue for "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

C random tests can generate dates from September 3 - September 13 1752

• ###### trashy_incelresolved a question on "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

that should be an issue, i checked the RNG in C and it can indeed generate such dates. raising

• ###### trashy_incelresolved an issue on "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

no, this is the point, there was no divisible-by-100 exception in the Julian calendar

• ###### saladuitcommented on "Area or Perimeter" c solution

Ah maybe I get it, you check if l - w != 0, and then add those numbers and multiply them by bitshifting them once. otherwise you're returning the square. Cool solution!

• ###### nomennesciocreated an issue for "Secret Agent Time Travel Calculations" kata

Description says : "leap years were on every year divisible by 4, without the exception of years divisible by 100."
is either bad English, or should be: "leap years were on every year divisible by 4, with the exception of years divisible by 100."

HOWEVER, the true Julian calendar had leap years every 4 years, except for some historic period where it was irregular.
Furthermore, it's stated that year 0 (which technically didn't exist at all on the Julian calendar!) is a leap year, although it's both divisible by 4 and 100.

• ###### blindvigilcommented on "Snail" cpp solution

Beautifully Simple!

Fixed ;-)