From: rick.rans@canada.com   
      
   Liz - Your right as usual. I didn't check her assertion that the first two   
   were inclusive.   
      
   So she needs Date max - Data min +1 to get the number of inclusive days.   
      
      
   "Liz McGuire"  wrote in message   
   news:45d10966$1@pnews.thedbcommunity.com...   
   > That's true, Rick, but the date math is correct in all cases.  High date   
   > minus low date is the numbers she shows and those numbers are correct and   
   > consistent - all are NOT inclusive of the first day, which is basic math.   
   >   
   > Liz   
   >   
   >   
   > Rick Rans wrote:   
   >> Don't know if this helps but the first two cross month boundaries and the   
   >> third one is in the same month.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> "Jeanette"  wrote in message   
   >> news:45d0c915$1@pnews.thedbcommunity.com...   
   >>> You're OK, I undersood what you said, I BELIEVE.   
   >>>   
   >>> Even though I know the ASSUME THEORY I ASSUMED the # would be the actual   
   >>> # of days like 12/31/05-1/1/05 would be 365 and not 364.   
   >>>   
   >>> I guess I am being too wordy.  Are there any SPECIFIC rules regarding   
   >>> the   
   >>> arithmentic of Dates?  I'm looking for some rules about when a date   
   >>> range   
   >>> will be INCLUSIVE.   
   >>>   
   >>> It seems like:   
   >>> a)  02/1/06-1/15/06 is INCLUSIVE (17)   
   >>> b)  12/31/05-9/15/05 is INCLUSIVE (107)   
   >>> BUT   
   >>> c)  10/1/06-1/1/06 is NOT INCLUSIVE (9)   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't understand why a&b are INCLUSIVE and c is NOT...   
   >>>   
   >>> SORRY - maybe it's in my face and I just don't see it !   
   >>>   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)