RE: doing date arithmetic in CL

[Joel Fritz <JFritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with you about date calculations in CL and the new Y2K myth, but in
all fairness, I think a lot of engineering calculations are based on
algorithms that work most of the time or at least produce results that are
"close enough."  e.g. Newtonian mechanics. The leap year algorithm that uses
4, 100, and 400 is only a pretty darned good approximation, admittedly a lot
better than the one that only uses 4.

I had an extra day off and need to slough off some of the extra energy
through pedantry. <g>

---A mind is a terrible thing to use.

Joel Fritz   

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcunnane@learningco.com [mailto:pcunnane@learningco.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 7:35 AM
> To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: doing date arithmetic in CL
> 
> 
>      <rant>
>      
>      And so yet another Y2K bug is introduced.  I have spent 
> the last few 
>      days in a blazing (online) argument with a guy who 
> claimed that Y2K 
>      was one big scam, and that programmers could never be so 
> lazy/stupid 
>      as to have allowed Y2K bugs to happen.  I wish he was 
> subscribed to 
>      this list...
>      
>      It kinda sets my teeth on edge to hear '...without 
> having to call an 
>      RPG program.' - how difficult is it to call a program?  It *is* 
>      difficult to do date arithmetic correctly in CL, and if 
> you don't do 
>      arithmetic correctly, your results will be wrong.  In my 
> book, there 
>      are no marks for an algorithm that works 'most of the time.'
>      
>      </rant>
>      
>      ____________
>      Paul Cunnane
>      The Learning Company
> 
> 
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---