dawn.com— Remember the Y2k bug and the hype surrounding it? It seems the hype is back. ( this ain't 'new news' but alot of people don't know about it )
Dec 28, 2005View in Crawl 4
"Using a 64-bit value will delay the problem date about 300 billion years. (To be more precise, it will happen on Sunday, December 4, 292,277,026,596 [1]). The year 292,277,026,596 problem is not, however, widely regarded as a pressing issue."Thank God we have a contingency plan, but i feel that our UberGrandchildren are lost...
"I don't remember seeing ANYTHING in the media or on the web about actual computer disruptions of any sort -- personal, business, industrial or corporate -- in January of 2000."The most I heard about was Peter Jennings saying that a lot of web sites were showing the date as January 1, 19100. However, that was less of a Y2K problem and more of a problem of web developers being lazy (slapping "19" on the front of the year string instead of actually adding 1900 to the year variable).
Jeez. Once again, using a 64-bit int type for time does NOT require a 64-bit processor. Even if you were running Xenix on an 8086, you can have 64-bit time.
The funny bit in this story is the author's attempt to provide a solution.'Use long integer values rather than the time_t typedef'. What the author,apparently does not understand is *why* typedefs are used.
mattman723Dec 28, 2005
"Using a 64-bit value will delay the problem date about 300 billion years. (To be more precise, it will happen on Sunday, December 4, 292,277,026,596 [1]). The year 292,277,026,596 problem is not, however, widely regarded as a pressing issue."Thank God we have a contingency plan, but i feel that our UberGrandchildren are lost...
lordelricDec 28, 2005
does this mean I have to but months of dried food and bottled water again. Good thing I got plety of time to start stocking up.
paradox183Dec 28, 2005
"I don't remember seeing ANYTHING in the media or on the web about actual computer disruptions of any sort -- personal, business, industrial or corporate -- in January of 2000."The most I heard about was Peter Jennings saying that a lot of web sites were showing the date as January 1, 19100. However, that was less of a Y2K problem and more of a problem of web developers being lazy (slapping "19" on the front of the year string instead of actually adding 1900 to the year variable).
paniqueDec 28, 2005
the sky is falling the sky is falling the sky is falling
mancatDec 28, 2005
Jeez. Once again, using a 64-bit int type for time does NOT require a 64-bit processor. Even if you were running Xenix on an 8086, you can have 64-bit time.
volz0rDec 28, 2005
The funny bit in this story is the author's attempt to provide a solution.'Use long integer values rather than the time_t typedef'. What the author,apparently does not understand is *why* typedefs are used.