From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: Y2K Issues
Date: 1998/10/25
Date: 1998-10-25T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <710nnc$jop@felix.seas.gwu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 362B8D2F.802F42E6@lmco.com
In article <362B8D2F.802F42E6@lmco.com>,
Howard W LUDWIG <howard.w.ludwig@lmco.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
>[Note: The fully general rule for leap year is that Year is a leap year
>if and only if
> (Year mod 4) = 0 and
> ((Year mod 100) /= 0 or (Year mod 400) = 0).]
>
Indeed.
As it so happens, I just saw this juicy bit of news:
According to "PC Week", issue of 10/19/98, Microsoft's
SQL Server 6.5's task manager refuses to recognize Feb.
29, 2000 as a valid date. Apparently Microsoft's programmers
never learned the real rules for leap years - a year divisible
by 400 _is_ one. Microsoft has acknowledged the bug and will
fix it in a "service pack" (Microsoft jargon for a patch).
Unlike the Y2K "problem", which is caused by the unintended
consequences of an old but intentional engineering decision
(2-digit years in the days of expensive storage), the leap-year
bug is a _bug_, and is, apparently much more widespread than
just this Microsoft case. In scouring code for the 2-digit
problem, they are discovering the bug as well.
Amazing. Where did these people go to school?
Mike Feldman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-10-25 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-10-19 0:00 Y2K Issues John J Cupak Jr
1998-10-19 0:00 ` dewar
1998-10-19 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-10-19 0:00 ` Joe Gwinn
1998-10-20 0:00 ` Joe Gwinn
1998-10-19 0:00 ` Niklas Holsti
[not found] ` <362B8D2F.802F42E6@lmco.com>
1998-10-20 0:00 ` dennison
1998-10-23 0:00 ` Michael F Brenner
1998-10-20 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-10-22 0:00 ` Mark Bennison
1998-10-22 0:00 ` dennison
1998-10-23 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-10-25 0:00 ` Michael Feldman [this message]
1998-10-26 0:00 ` dennison
1998-10-27 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-10-27 0:00 ` John Herro
1998-10-27 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-10-27 0:00 ` Y2K Issues (well, not really...) Dave Wood
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Y2K Issues dennison
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1998-10-26 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1998-10-26 0:00 ` Joel Seidman
1998-10-26 0:00 ` Y2K Issues - Warning Off-Topic Al Christians
1998-10-27 0:00 ` Y2K Issues dewarr
1998-10-27 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-10-29 0:00 ` system
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Al Christians
1998-11-02 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1998-11-04 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-11-05 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-11-06 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-11-06 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
1998-11-07 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-11-06 0:00 ` Al Christians
1998-11-08 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
1998-11-08 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-10-27 0:00 ` Gautier de Montmollin
1998-10-28 0:00 ` dewar
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Gautier.DeMontmollin
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-10-29 0:00 ` dewar
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-10-30 0:00 ` dennison
1998-10-31 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-11-02 0:00 ` dennison
1998-10-30 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1998-10-30 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1998-10-31 0:00 ` dewar
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Samuel Mize
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Mark A Biggar
1998-10-28 0:00 ` adam
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Al Christians
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Samuel Mize
1998-11-04 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-10-28 0:00 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1998-10-28 0:00 ` adam
1998-10-29 0:00 ` Gautier.DeMontmollin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-10-23 0:00 Condic, Marin D.
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox