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: 103376,577c9f9c0cdd76d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert A Duff Subject: Re: Confusing language, was Re: Help help.. please.i am totaly new in ada programing Date: 1999/11/09 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 546486798 Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) References: <7vqgs2$lcc$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38233108.F3540F0@ebox.tninet.se> <806716$i6c2@ftp.kvaerner.com> <807109$8m0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38270DC7.86553BB1@pwfl.com> Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Marin Condic writes: > Y2K is not a bug. It is a feature. Y2K is simply caused by a design > limitation that does not allow the software to work past 1999. This was > a conscious choice to sacrifice useful life span in exchange for space > efficiency. ... That might be true in some cases, but I think that in the vast majority of cases, Y2K bugs were caused by sloppiness. After all, I can encode 256 years in one 8-bit byte. So please explain how encoding a mere 100 years in two bytes saves memory! Furthermore, show me the documentation that explains that this was an intended limitation, and the reasons for it. Show me the code that says "Max_Year: constant Year_Number := 1999; -- ....". I'll bet that in the vast majority of cases, nobody bothered to write anything like that down, which supports my "sloppiness" claim. > An analogy might be if you had some less than successful surgery years > ago prior to the general availability of surgical microscopes. The techniques needed to properly encode limitations such as the y2K limit have been known since the 1960's, at least. The fact that they weren't used is no excuse. Changing the limit from 1999 to 2099 or 9999 should be a one-line change, and it shouldn't cost millions of dollars to find that line. - Bob