Re: Y2K -- A Broader Perspective

["Dale E. Boyce" <dale@radpro.uchicago.edu>]

Yykes.  Mr. Yourdon is certainly a well known author.  Everyone
should takes a close look at the databases they use.  I
thought mine was Y2K okay because it works with four digit
years and the system keeps time in minutes past some magic
date in the past.  On closer exam this is great for system
supplied dates, but data entry screens that accept 2 digit
years round to 1900 if 00 is entered.  The good news is our
program is in-house and can be fixed (we believe) by upgrading
the database and recompiling the programs (fingers crossed).

I would recommend that everyone who can, reset their system clock to
the year 2000, and excercise their programs to see what happens.

<insert tongue in cheek>  Considering the govenments acknowledgement
that most of the federal agencies are way behind, maybe the
solution is to revise the calendar to 1900 in the year 2000
</insert tongue in cheek>

Dale Boyce
dale@radpro.uchicago.edu