Re: Y2K tools for BPCS 5.1

["Ardi Batmanghelidj" <ardibatman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Zoran

When I wrote this email, I had hoped for a deeper TECHNICAL discussion of 
the merits of the two techniques. Expansion VS Encapsulation. (I would still 
welcome this, on or off-line). Instead, we got this venomous cross oceanic 
mud slinging.

Based on MS4's numbers, there seem to be many companies that have opted for 
this approach, so I concede that "you and many others" have found reasons to 
go the encapsualtion route.

It does not change the fact that the same mentality of following expediency, 
allowed many to come to the end of the century still programming 6 digit 
dates.

With Regards
Ardi Batmanghelidj
978 443 1304




>From: Zoran Pirjevec <Zoranp@idt.net>
>Reply-To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
>To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
>Subject: Re: Y2K tools for BPCS 5.1
>Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 08:23:42 -0400
>
>Ardi,
>
>"Have you missed the concept" you ask? Many others and I think the answer 
>is
>yes. If you have the time and inclination for an indepth discussion, please 
>feel
>free to contact me.
>
>Regards
>
>Zoran Pirjevec
>
>Ardi Batmanghelidj wrote:
>
> > Glenn
> >
> > With several years in the business and one huge Y2K project under my 
>belt, I
> > can not understand why anyone would populate their database with false
> > representation of dates. Updating the dates with -28 years locks you 
>into
> > perpetual date manipulation in all new programs, external file 
>transfers,
> > SQL, Query, Excel ETC, ETC.
> >
> > If the argument is speed of remediation, there are tools which insert
> > programming right before a date representation on screens and reports 
>which
> > take the date from CYMD to MDY or DMY. They also do the reverse when
> > comparing file and screen values or updating screen values into the 
>file.
> > What is the difference between this and having code inserted into every
> > program which adds and subtracts 28 years to every date field in a 
>record.
> > As a bonus, dates in the files will contain real values.
> >
> > My experience is with 405CD in a heavily modified installation with over
> > 3000 programs. I do not have experience with +/- 28. Have I missed the
> > concept?
> >
> > I would appreciate any feedback and dialogue.
> >
> > Ardi
> >
> > >From: Glenn Ericson <Glenn-Ericson@att.net>
> > >Reply-To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
> > >To: BPCS-L@midrange.com
> > >CC: MKLBOURDIN@wanadoo.fr (Michael BOURDIN)
> > >Subject: Re: Y2K tools for BPCS 5.1
> > >Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 15:52:01 -0400
> > >
> > ><< attach1 >>
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> > +---
> > | This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
> > | To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
> > | To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> > | Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
> > +---
><< Zoranp.vcf >>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---