From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ed09815e1f9264a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mfb@mbunix.mitre.org (Michael F Brenner)
Subject: Re: 5th USENIX Conf on Object-Oriented Tech & Sys (COOTS'99) - CFP
Date: 1998/05/17
Message-ID: <6jld5o$c7d@top.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 354389132
References: <EswwJ2.EBG@usenix.org>
 <199805141444.QAA10968@basement.replay.com>
 <uwwbnqmby.fsf@ANARRES.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-shoot-me>
 <m2iun6mh2r.fsf@wf-rch.cirr.com>
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford Mass.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-05-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


    > ... we went straight from 1 BC to 1 AD

No. Both systems were invented quite a bit later. 
The year 1 BC is simply a different system representation for 0 AD.
Similarly, 1 AD is simply a different system representation for 0 BC.
It is arbitrary (and not mathematically useful) to hold that the
millenium began in 1 AD instead of 0 AD. The people who experienced
that millenial change did not change their calendars at all.