Thanks for your kindness Sylvain. So bolding wasn't enough :) Even I had trouble locating my own reply. OK so your message is a start for my new convention. I'll separate it from original with empty line + horizontal line from now on :) But would place it at bottom as before unless last reply is not at top :)
Cetin
>Hi Cetin,
>
>I want to ask you a favor: could you at least insert a blank line before and after your replies? I love to read your replies, because I learn a lot from them, but I have a hard time locating them in the text. As an example, I had to read the text 3 times to locate your reply in the following message.
>
>Thanks :)
>
>>>Greetings John!
>>>
>>>FoxPro is immune; but really, the 9/9/99 scenario is a non-issue. Old legacy programs never really used four nines as a date since months and days are always two digits long. September 9, 1999 would be stored as "090999" and not "9999".
>>
would be stored as "19990909"Assuming year is 1999 and not 2099, 2199... and the date is in format mdy or dmy (otherwise not a date at all).
>>Since foxbase storage is in format YYYYMMDD.
>>Cetin
>>>
>>>The greater danger has already passed. It occurred on April 9, 1999. Since many programmers use julian dates or some similar mechanism, the 99th day of the year 1999 could really have been stored as "9999." But the day passed without a murmur.
>>>
>>>Of course, unless a Y2K-glitch is so severe that it makes the news, most companies won't even admit they're having a problem. Better to slide the dirt under the rug, fix the error as quickly as possible, and don't alarm the media, the employees and most importantly, the shareholders.
>>>
>>>Cheers, Harry
>>>
>>>P.S. I'm really looking forward to February 29, 2000 -- NOT January 1, 2000. Any system which can't differentiate between 1900 and 2000 is going to have a real headache on this day because 1900 wasn't a leap year.
