lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Y2k compliance
Hello;


You obviously have not dealt with Microsoft Winnt 4.0
and all the Service Pack then. While one Service Pack
did somewhat correct the Y2K problem was not aware that
2000 was in fact a leap year. There was no way to set
the date to Feb 29, 2000.

So yes there are braindead programmers out there.

Myreen Johan wrote:
>
> >So how does it cope with 2000 being a leep year?
>
> I don't understand the fuzz about year 2000 being
> a leap year. The simplistic formula for finding
> out if a year is a leap year is to check if it is
> divisible by four. That formula is valid from the
> year 1901 until the year 2100. We're talking sbout
> lazy programmers not being able to see even 5-10
> years into the future. The "Year 2000 is a Leap
> Year" problem is kind of the Y2K problem inversed.
>
> Do do you really expect to find programs out there
> written by programmers informed enough to take
> into account that years divisible by 100 are not
> leap years, but *at* *the* *same* *time* don't
> know that years divisible by 400 are leap years
> after all?
>
> Has anybody ever bumped into this problem in real
> life? I suspect this "problem" is just the product
> of the Y2K consultants' imagination.
>
> Johan Myréen
> jem@iki.fi
>


--
Terry L. Ridder
Blue Danube Software (Blaue Donau Software)
"We do not write software, we compose it."

entertaining angels
by the light of my computer screen
24-7 you wait for me
entertaining angels
while the night becomes history
host of heaven, sing over me
==Entertaining Angels==Newsboys

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans