Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 22:41:26 -0400 (EDT) From: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@home.net> To: dnelson@emsphone.com, questions@FreeBSD.ORG, dnelson@emsphone.com Subject: Re: Year 2000 Message-ID: <199805190241.WAA09248@istari.home.net> In-Reply-To: Mail from 'Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com>' dated: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:33:58 -0500
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> > > Unfortunately, > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xsh/strptime.html > > requires that 69-99 refer to 19xx and 00-68 refer to 20xx. I don't > like it either, mainly because any date printed as a 2-sigit number is > *much* more likely to be in the 1900-1999 range. Birthdates, contract > start dates, etc etc. This seems "wrong". The first part of the opengroup definition and the FreeBSD definition seem to imply the following: "%y is the year within century." 'Today' - "11/22/02" => 11/22/1902 '2000+' - "11/22/02" => 11/22/2002 which seems equally bad. I don't understand who the Open Group is, and what is the avenue for requesting a change to Unix V2 specification? I'd vote for amending the strptime(3) man page to include: BUGS The results of using the %y construct are imprecise since the century is not specified. It is recommended that programmers use the %Y construct. -SR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199805190241.WAA09248>