>No problem here, Jim; my decision to use the native expression in this context was premised on an assumption that the cost was more on the order of magnitude level, rather than a factor of two. I'd be pleased to death to know that the cost of using the more maintainable and understandable UDF if the impact is really that small.

Ed,

Oh yes, and the part I forgot to mention is that I tested the worst case scenario, where the year was never a leap year so it evaled every one of the cases every time. Given random years the result might be reduced by the years that tested true for an leap year as certain of the cases would be skipped.