>>Jim,
>>
>>>That would result in 1600 not being a leap year and it was as was 1200 adn will be in 2400.
>>
>>Unfortunately, I though 1600 was not a leap year, and 1200 certainly was not either. Leap years where invented after 1600 (by some pope i think). ;-)
>>
>
>Walter,
>
>Interesting then VFP has a major bug in that ?MONTH({^1600/02/29}) returns 2 and MONTH({^1700/02/29}) returns an error of an invalid date.
>
>Boy, this is really going to screw up all those Shakespeare tracking apps I have out there.

I also remember that some days in august where skipped to composate the timedelay build up from the year 1. I've forgot the exact year and dates. maybe someone could help me here.

Yes, I think you're right, these dates should not be valid within VFP and could be considered as a Date-bug.

Walter,