Patrick,

It sounds like you're in pretty good shape. The only thing VFP 5.0 will give you is the ability to set a "roll-over" year. For instance, you could set the roll-over to 30. Any two-digit year entered by the user that's less than 30 will be interpreted as being in the 21st century, any two-digit year >=30 will be considered to be in the 20th century. This is nice because your users can continue entering 2-digit years as always. Of course, if you need to enter data that cover 100 years or more, this isn't such a good solution.

Also, there's an article in the March FoxPro Advisor that demonstrates a method for simulating this in FP 2.6. One important "gotcha" is 2/29/2000. Years divisible by 100 are not leap years unless they're also divisible by 400. This means that while 2/29/1900 was not a valid date, 2/29/2000 is.

You also need to be sure that you're really not doing any date calculation. Especially watch out for CTOD() and LUPDATE(). Both behave differently with CENTURY set ON.


>We are currently having discussions about FP 2.6 (Dos and Windows) and the Y2000. We have mutiple programs written in Fox that "the powers to be" say needs to be updated to VFP 5.0 to Y2000 compliant. I don't think going to VFP 5.0 will make the program Y2000 comp. We have expanded all screen input fields to show centuries with some error checking. We have also added a slide date routine (specs taken from IBM whitepaper) to deal with legacy data (We read info from a mainframe, no century stored). I know that using the date() function could cause problems but we do not use it for any calculations. What I would like to know is if there is a source that explains any short comings of FP 2.6 or VFP 5.0 and the Y2000, or any othe gotchas that we need to be made aware of.
>Thanks