Re: Y2.1K Compliance

[STEVEN.J.RYAN@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

David Gibbs

You said

Well, strictly speaking, if the software was upgraded to Y2K compliance
using a 7 digit date (CYYMMDD) instead of a 8 digit date (YYYYMMDD), then
it would *NOT* be Y2.1K compliant....


Perhaps I don't understand CYYMMDD properly, but I would have thought that the
2000's were century 1, 2100's were century 2, etc.  Therefore 2105/05/08 would
be 2050508, and would give the right comparison against 2098/11/06, which would
be 1981106.  Or is there something I'm missing here?


+---
| 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
+---