Re: [HACKERS] postgres and year 2000

On 11 Jan 1999, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:

> "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
>
> > We do need to handle two-digit years, [...]
>
> Is it at all possible to get away with _not_ doing so? It is, after
> all, incredibly stupid to use two-digit years in anything but spoken
> conversation, so in a way, I'd prefer computer systems to blankly
> refuse them. If they're allowed at all, I'd say parse them so that a
> year specification of '99' means the actual year 99. _Not_ 1999.

Falling back to a Unix standard...type 'cal 99' and see which year you
get :)

I agree with Tom on this...if someone types a year of 99, we should
presume that whomever entered it knew what they were entering, and/or that
the programmer of the interface had enough sense to program checks into
it...

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org