General discussion

Locked

A day - bit simmilar to Y2k (1-Jan-2010)

By AmjadM ·
One point has just emerged in my mind that 1st Jan 2010 is a day a bit simmilar to Y2k for which we have not yet thought of any thing un-usual. Which may occur in computer programmes, electronic devices having any date factor. Although the chances are remote but some thing may happen due to some single-digit-Year approach, the system date may happen to become Year 2000 instead of Year 2010.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

8 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

don't think anything will happen

by .Martin. In reply to A day - bit simmilar to Y ...

as most programs us two digit years (if not four) 2010 should be ok...

all we have to worry about is 03:14:08 UTC on 19 January 2038

Collapse -

Example!

by AmjadM In reply to don't think anything will ...

I Give You an example
Think of a programmer who in Jan 2001 was writing a program (a temporary solution) meant only to be used for next couple of years. He might have focused the right-most digit.

Later that particular program becomes a necessity and users keep using it!

I am using the phrase 'May happan'

What do you think...?

Collapse -

I can't see a programmer being that sloppy

by .Martin. In reply to Example!

for the half second it is going to take, they would go for at least a two digit year, if only one digit years were used, we would have this problem every 10 years, and someone would have figured it easier to write the program right in the first place.

Collapse -

Think of Human error

by AmjadM In reply to I can't see a programmer ...

I respect your opinion.

Human errors occur, it's natural, and remedies are done.

On frequently hear people (mostly intellectuals) cursing 'Ah..Stupid, I made a silly mistake..'.

Day one, Day two is fine... But when an error remains hidden for the whole decade that 'can' cost a lot.

Collapse -

Any programmer using a single-digit year is an idiot. Period.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to Example!

Data storage has come down in price. The use of any 'Year' format besides four digits is inexcusable.

Assuming a program is temporary is also idiotic. Y2K taught us that 'temporary' programs may be running decades after they were written.

Your hypothetical programmer should seek a career that involves the phrase, "Would you like fries with that?"

Collapse -

That would be a four-digit year field.

by seanferd In reply to A day - bit simmilar to Y ...

How would a four-digit year field affect the scenario?

Collapse -

I Give You an example

by AmjadM In reply to That would be a four-digi ...

Think of a programmer who in Jan 2001 was writing a program (a temporary solution) meant only to be used for next couple of years. He might have focused the right-most digit.

Later that particular program becomes a necessity and users keep using it!

I am using the phrase 'May happan'

What do you think...?

Collapse -

Nope.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to A day - bit simmilar to Y ...

The problem with Y2K was many older programs stored the year by using only the last two digits; the leading '19' was assumed. This was due to the high cost of data storage at the time. Almost all programs were rewritten to expand the date fields to include a four-digit year. This will probably be a problem in the year 9999, when we'll solve the problem by thawing all those COBOL programmers out of cryogenic storage.

Back to Software Forum
8 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums