Re: Y2.1K Compliance

Howdy,

Did I read this right? They want to know if your software will properly handle 
the
transition to the year 2100?

ROFLMAO!

Who cares?  Smells like some consulting firm trying to make an issue out of a 
non
issue.  How about asking them if THEY will be around in 2100.

STEVEN.J.RYAN@denso.com.au wrote:

> 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
+---