Re: Year 2000

June Tong wrote: > > Nils Myklebust (Nils.Myklebust@idg.no) wrote: > : But I do believe ver. 4.x is as year 2000 compliant as anything except > : for it not supporting the dbcentury environement variable. That is you > : will have to show and key in years with 4 digits. Dates have allways > : been represented the same way internally in Informix engines, so there > : ought not to be any problem. > > If "year 2000 compliance" is defined as storing 4-digit years and not getting > confused when the millenium hits, then yes, all Informix versions are "year > 2000 compliant". The two things to be aware of with the older versions of > products is lack of support for DBCENTURY (as mentioned above) and the fact > that 2-digit years will be defaulted to 19xx, even after the year 2000. > This means that if you say: > INSERT INTO orders (order_date) VALUES ("11/11/11");> You will get November 11, 1911, no matter what the current year is. Then who is taking care of the translation between the internal stored integers representing the year, and the actual understandable form of the year (05/10/1997 eg) ? I mean there was (is) a lot of confusion about if 2000 is a leap year or not. Most OSses had/have this part wrong. Guy