[Coco] Julian Date

Wed May 24 01:49:01 EDT 2017

I have fixed the problem by floating the integer year variable, forcing
Basic09 to use the real version of MOD. It now correctly determines leap
year. I also added an assignment statement setting the leapYear Boolean to
FALSE before the condition statements are executed. In addition, I have
gotten the JDN to be correct, though it is still a half-day more. Example,
1-1-1900 shows as 2415033.5. Not knowing enough about JDN calculations, I
don't know what to do to change that. I will post the code tomorrow if
possible.

On May 23, 2017 10:39 PM, "Gene Heskett" <gheskett at shentel.net> wrote:

> On Tuesday 23 May 2017 23:37:44 Wayne Campbell wrote:
>
> > I was merely going by the .75 remainder in calculator. I didn't do the
> > math to see it is 300 and not 3.
> >
> > Regardless, the Basic09 MOD function is broken as it returns 0 for the
> > result.
>
> It may be that how you are using the function is whats broken.
>
> Have you tried initializing a 3 member array of INTEGER's, one with 1900,
> or whatever year you want to check, named "int1" and assign "int2"=400,
> then do a
>
> int3=MOD(int1,int2)?
>
> then to see it, print-using, using the correct formatting string, int3?
>
> That is straight from my original 1983 revision G level 1 Basic09 green
> manual on page 8-5
>
> Basic09 can handle keyboard input, but that keyboard input is normally
> assigned to a string variable as you type  which then must be made into
> an INTEGER in a different named integer with the VAL function before it
> can properly be used in a math function such as MOD(num1,num2)
>
> Glaringly, it specifies the format of the MOD function as returning
> INTEGER or BYTE.  Apparently no REAL's allowed. And in this case both
> numbers are bigger than a BYTE.  So DIM them all as INTEGER's.
>
> I've not used MOD in about a dozen coons ages, but I did, just for grins,
> do the K&R C books version in basic09 and got the same answers until I
> ran out of basic09's precision, which is about 8 digits less than our C
> compiler's output.  And both blew up running backwards in the year -4713
> BC.
>
> > On May 23, 2017 8:32 PM, "Walter Zambotti" <zambotti at iinet.net.au>
> > wrote:
> >
> > The result of 1900 MOD 400 should always be 300 as it 100 short of the
> > next 400 at 2000.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Coco [mailto:coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
> > Campbell Sent: Wednesday, 24 May 2017 11:29 AM
> > To: CoCoList <coco at maltedmedia.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Coco] Julian Date
> >
> > I have the procedure working, mostly. Two problems.
> >
> > 1. Result shows 1.5 days more than the correct Julian day.
> > 2. I have found a bug in the MOD function (integer version). If you
> > type:
> >
> > PRINT MOD(1900,400)
> >
> > The result is 0. It should not be 0 on 1900. There should be a
> > remainder of 3, or .75.
> >
> > You can verify this by running Basic09, creating a new procedure,
> > typing in the above instruction, closing the editor and running the
> > procedure. I was shocked when I found this. I never expected it.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > On May 23, 2017 7:37 PM, "Luis Fernández" <luis46coco at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > OR
> > >
> > >
> > > FUNCTION FechaJulDMA (tjul, dd, mm, aa) T = tjul + 62
> > > t2 = FIX(T / 1461) * 4 + 1700
> > > t1 = T MOD 1461
> > > IF t1 > 365 THEN
> > > t1 = t1 - 1
> > > oa = FIX(t1 / 365)
> > > t1 = t1 MOD 365
> > > END IF
> > > aa = t2 + oa
> > > dias = t1 + 1
> > > dd = dias
> > > swb = 1 - SGN(oa)
> > > IF dd > 212 + swb THEN dd = dd + 30
> > > IF dd > 59 + swb THEN dd = dd + 2 - swb mm = FIX(dd / 61) * 2 + 1 dd
> > > = dd MOD 61 IF dd > 31 THEN mm = mm + 1: dd = dd - 31 IF mm > 7 THEN
> > > mm = mm - 1 FechaJulDMA = dias END FUNCTION
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---------------------
> > >
> > > Making  CoCoDskUtil V 1.X.X, Scan magazines and organize maltedmedia
> > >
> > > http://cococoding.com/cocodskutil/ Thank Aaron Wolfe
> > >
> > > http://www.tandycoco.com<http://www.tandycoco.com/> Thank Brian
> > > Blake
> > >
> > > My personal blog: http://www.luis45ccs.blogspot.com,
> > >
> > > Excuse my English, I use google translator, my language is Spanish,
> > > I'm Spanish but I live in Venezuela
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---------------------
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > De: Coco <coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com> en nombre de phillip taylor
> > > < ptaylor2446 at gmail.com>
> > > Enviado: martes, 23 de mayo de 2017 08:38 p.m.
> > > Para: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts
> > > Asunto: Re: [Coco] Julian Date
> > >
> > > Thank you but I did not write this code I got it off the internet.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Mark McDougall
> > > <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > On 24/05/2017 8:46 AM, phillip taylor wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure what you mean by this "At least those skilled in
> > > > BASIC09
> > > >
> > > >> will be able to fund an early retirement! ;)" but there is
> > > >> nothing wrong with Basic09 or most of the other compilers that
> > > >> run under Rsdos or Microsoft Windows. Cbasic will compile a basic
> > > >> program to machine lanuage and will run 1 to 1000 faster then a
> > > >> program written
> >
> > in Basic.
> >
> > > > Not sure how you took away that I was criticizing BASIC09 or any
> > > > other language from that statement?!?
> > > >
> > > > I was referring to the COBOL programmers that retired off the back
> > > > of the Y2K problem, implying that the situation would be the same
> > > > in 2400 (ignoring the fact that it has been pointed out that it
> > > > isn't actually a leap year) for BASIC09 programmers.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, if one has to explain one's jokes then I guess they've
> > > > fallen flat. :( I tried...
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Mark McDougall
> > > > <http://retroports.blogspot.com.au>
> > > >
>
> >
> > --
> > Coco mailing list
> > Coco at maltedmedia.com
> > https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett
> --
> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
>  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
> -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
> Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>