Re: 2039 cutoff -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: 2039 cutoff
From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 14:11:17 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

I am pretty adamant about "real" dates also. I've heard the arguments
against it. Mostly dealing with "special" dates. A bulk of which could
be handled by using null - some by reserved special dates for special
meanings like using 0001-01-01 for this and 0001-01-02 for that...

But, that being out of the way, they could have been using real dates and
converting from iso to mmddyy for no other reason than to save screen real
estate.

Since Bruce Vining has posted this month (and about dates - no less) let's
see if he pipes in.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.