Re: Y2K39

[Jerry Draper <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

If you think Y2K39 is a problem just consider what a mess we will have 
when we get to year 10000 (9999 plus 1).

Jerry

On 4/22/2015 12:13 PM, Dan wrote:
> In another thread, I am seeking advice on finding an error related to a
> date past 2039, given the system's 1940-2039 2-digit year "window".
>
> Someone posted a comment "Y2K39 :-)", and I have to wonder, are we going to
> see Y2K-like projects all over again because of shortsighted fixes made
> back in the 1990's that made no changes to fields using 2-digit years?
> Because, of course, there was no way that any of these applications would
> be running in another 40 years, right?  As if we hadn't already learned our
> lesson with Y2K. But I digress.
>
> Is there a chance IBM will shift that window to something like 1960-2059 at
> some point in the future?  I've thought there might be a system value that
> would allow each shop to customize this window.  But I can see where that
> would be problematic as well.
>
> Is the Power i the only system affected by the 1940-2039 2-digit year
> "window"?
>
> - Dan