Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!haven!decuac!hussar.dco.dec.com!mjr
From: mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. Ranum)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP status files and wierd dates - revisted.
Message-ID: <1990Nov22.024607.7474@decuac.dec.com>
Date: 22 Nov 90 02:46:07 GMT
References: <736@dynasys.UUCP> <803@sci34hub.UUCP> <754@dynasys.UUCP>
Sender: news@decuac.dec.com (Network News)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Washington Ultrix Resource Center
Lines: 25

In article <754@dynasys.UUCP> jessea@dynasys.UUCP () writes:

>WHY is this date used?  WHY can't the beginning of the year be used instead?

	What about stuff that's older than Jan 1, 1990 ? I have some
stuff from back then... Should we start dating it in negative time ?
And, once we've laboriously converted every single database, file, and
whatnot that we have that contains a date, are we supposed to do it
all over again Jan 1, 1991 ?

	Timestamps are critical to a lot of real-world applications -
it's one thing to ignore time if you're running a floppy-based PC, but
it's another if you have a few gig of data that your business relies
on. The UNIX solution to handling time is brilliant, elegant, and
you'll come to realize it the first time [pun intended] you have to
write something that needs to safe-store things based on time on a
machine that handles it, say, as an ASCII string that includes a
daylight savings code.

mjr.
-- 
"When choosing between two evils, give preference to the council of your
tummy over that of your testes. The history of mankind is full of disasters
that could have been averted by a good meal, followed by a nap on the couch."
		-Me, as explained to me by my wife's cat Strummer.