Re:RFC 2550 – Y10K and Beyond (1999)
by _jomo on Sunday March 15, 2015 @09:49AM
(#9206466)
You can already hit these problems today. People always think about the current date, although there very valid are reasons to store future (or past) dates.
For example, if you're are a scientist you might want to calculate where planet xyz is in 100,000 years - and store that date on your computer, today.
Re:RFC 2550 – Y10K and Beyond (1999)
by perlgeek on Sunday March 15, 2015 @11:11AM
(#9206718)
One doesn't have to go that far. Mortgages, life insurance, annuity assurance and the like can run for more than the mere 23 years that are between now and 2038.
Heck, I won't even be retired in 2038 if things continue to work as they do now.
Re:RFC 2550 – Y10K and Beyond (1999)
by _jomo on Sunday March 15, 2015 @01:09PM
(#9207178)
Apparently it already caused trouble with AOLServer in 2006 [0] because there was a database connection timeout of 1 billion seconds which hit the 32bit limit.
Re:RFC 2550 – Y10K and Beyond (1999)
by thomasfoster96 on Sunday March 15, 2015 @10:54AM
(#9206680)
It's interesting seeing how Wikidata has been storing dates. They store things like the time that the universe started as a date, which means the year is about 11 digits.
JavaScript's Date object doesn't like such big dates - I don't think it works with anything greater than a few hundred million years.
For example, if you're are a scientist you might want to calculate where planet xyz is in 100,000 years - and store that date on your computer, today.
Heck, I won't even be retired in 2038 if things continue to work as they do now.
[0]: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09...
JavaScript's Date object doesn't like such big dates - I don't think it works with anything greater than a few hundred million years.
What's the bet this one actually causes problems