Re: Y2K Blowup

["Kevin Watkins" <kevinw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Buck,

I got the same question to the ones who are saying that on April 9th things
will blow using Julian because it is the 99th day of the year (99099)... I
have seen some programs return all nines (99999) for a bad Julian
date/conversion but never 99099. But hey... I can't speak for someone's
logic years ago can I? I worked on a system once that had just a single
digit year... talk about built in obsolescence!

/* J. Kevin Watkins
    Sun Industries, Inc (a Hurt Enterprise)
    http://www.hurtcompanies.com
    kevinw@hurtcompanies.com */



>
>>Have any of you folks with sturdy (but
>>non-compliant) applications taking advantage
>>of the DATE type variable requiring a valid date
>>that uses 9/9/99 as the default upper limit for
>>report delimiting consider
>
>Dean,
>Have you come across special dates of 09/09/99?  I've typically seen
>99/99/99...
>
>Buck Calabro
>CommSoft, Albany, NY
>mailto:mcalabro@commsoft.net
>


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---