Re: HELP! YEAR 2000 BUG: How will it affect you?

Also, it seems that there is a lot of discussion about the leap year, but almost none about the new millenium. Either most people do not consider it a problem (having already considered it), or they have not considered it, or there is a global fix should it present any difficulties. Any dataset that draws information from external systems that have legacy code that is date-dependent on a two-digit field could be affected by Y2K as far as I can tell. Any system not already set to deal with the millenium date change, and not equipped with a global default that can be easily modified, may require some work. As I have mentioned on other comp.databases NGs, even if you're turning the crank to solve the "problem" (however insignificant it may seem), if you have to turn the crank a LOT, it's time consuming. If you have to look to find each instance of where/when to turn the crank, and have to turn it a bunch of times, it gets more time consuming. If you have to essentially redocument legacy code to do the above...well, you get the idea. So, is it really a "non-problem" for all but the legacy systems? Do all other systems have toggles or global defaults that easily allow redefinition of both incoming data and stored data? (yeah, do you have to now define two outcomes: 1900's for data received before a given date, and 2000's for data received after a given date?) Pardon my ignorance if some of my questions are horribly thin on understanding, but I did my databasing on flat ascii files and used basic Vax commands for managing the stuff - not very sophisticated, I know. So, I know enough to be an interested and somewhat informed Joe Public, but not enough to know which systems are already bulletproof regarding dealing with the millenium date change. Hence, my questions and my interest in doing this as a white paper in the first place... Matt Bovee Univ. Kansas jlumbley@netcom.com (Joe Lumbley) wrote: >Jack Parker (jparker@boi.hp.com) wrote: >: > ><snip> >: divisible by 100 or 400 are worrying about the year 2100. I sure hope >: my code isn't still running then - what a pain to support from beyond the >: pale. >Programmer's dual definition of hell: > a. Still being alive then and having to support it... > b. Being forced to support your code for eternity.... >(think I'll start going to church....) >Seriously....this thread certainly points up the fact the we as programmers >**really are** confused about Y2K...lots of folks missed the not divisible >by 400 exception. >Joe >-- >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Joe Lumbley(jlumbley@netcom.com) >---------------------------------------------------------------------------