Motivation of software professionals
in [JavaScript]
|
Prev: When writing html table to div, the data from table is unformatted
Next: multi file download with one click
From: Lars Enderin on 17 Feb 2010 10:07 Richard Bos wrote: > Flash Gordon <smap(a)spam.causeway.com> wrote: > >> I know there is software flying around today that is running on Z80 >> processors (well, the military variant of them) and the plan in the late >> 90s was for it to continue for another 20 years (I don't know the >> details, but a customer signed off on some form of ongoing support >> contract). Admittedly the software I used was not doing date processing >> (apart from the test rigs, which used the date on printouts, which I >> tested to "destruction" which turned out to be 2028). > > Single signed byte? Was it really 2028? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem.
From: Richard Heathfield on 17 Feb 2010 10:14 Lars Enderin wrote: > Richard Bos wrote: >> Flash Gordon <smap(a)spam.causeway.com> wrote: >> >>> I know there is software flying around today that is running on Z80 >>> processors (well, the military variant of them) and the plan in the late >>> 90s was for it to continue for another 20 years (I don't know the >>> details, but a customer signed off on some form of ongoing support >>> contract). Admittedly the software I used was not doing date processing >>> (apart from the test rigs, which used the date on printouts, which I >>> tested to "destruction" which turned out to be 2028). >> Single signed byte? > > Was it really 2028? Quite possibly. Not every problem ending in 8 is a 2038 problem. If the test rigs had 1900 as a base date (and yes, there's still plenty of software around that thinks 1900 was a very good year), then the single signed byte Richard Bos mentioned would be good for representing all years from then until 2027 (assuming 8 bits to the byte). It would fail in 2028, quite possibly giving the year as 1772 instead. -- Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk> Email: -http://www. +rjh@ "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line vacant - apply within
From: Lew on 17 Feb 2010 10:15 Richard Bos wrote: > I've seen that - _my_ manager, in _my_ fix in _my_ program - in 1995. > Three years later he thought that it would be a good idea for me to > start paying attention to this Y2K thing he'd just heard about. > > And then there's the users. Don't get me started on the users. Yeah. Our jobs would be so much easier if we only didn't have customers! Don't dis the customers, man. Having a derogatory attitude toward "users" (there are only two industries that call their customers "users") is a major arrogance. Shame on you. -- Lew
From: Richard Heathfield on 17 Feb 2010 10:17 Lew wrote: > Richard Bos wrote: >> I've seen that - _my_ manager, in _my_ fix in _my_ program - in 1995. >> Three years later he thought that it would be a good idea for me to >> start paying attention to this Y2K thing he'd just heard about. >> >> And then there's the users. Don't get me started on the users. > > Yeah. Our jobs would be so much easier if we only didn't have customers! > > Don't dis the customers, man. Having a derogatory attitude toward > "users" (there are only two industries that call their customers > "users") is a major arrogance. Shame on you. Nevertheless, Sturgeon's Law applies. -- Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk> Email: -http://www. +rjh@ "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line vacant - apply within
From: Lew on 17 Feb 2010 10:58
Branimir Maksimovic wrote: > One guy who claimed wrote sw for robots dind;t knew how much is 2^32 ;) Actually, a correct answer to that is "2^32". So you gave him the answer in the question. Another correct answer is "100000000 base 16". If you are disparaging the guy for simply not knowing the expansion to decimal digits, well, Albert Einstein didn't bother memorizing his home phone number on the basis that he could simply look it up in the phone book on those rare occasions when he needed it. > I think that are very few people who know ho to program computers these > days. That's only a problem if those people who don't know how to program are paid based on a claim that they do. Unfortunately that happens a lot. -- Lew |