Re: XyWrite update

[Carl Distefano CLDistefano@xxxxxxxx]

Reply to note from "Russ W. Urquhart"  Fri, 17
Sep 1999 09:17:02 -0500


-> On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 09:01:01AM -0400, Nathan Sivin wrote:
-> > Actually I couldn't care less
-> > if directory entries called up within the program have the wrong
-> > year.
->
-> Actually this was kind of my feeling, after reading that this
-> was all that was changed. I mean, the way the upgrade process
-> was described, you'd of thought that there were potentially a
-> raft of changes interspersed thru the executable.

There's one other correction: to the "soft" date commands,
DA [datemask] and . If you don't use DA (or don't
use it with the two-digit "yy" mask), then this, too, is a non-issue.

As for the VA statement, XPL routines using the "yy" mask *will*
misbehave after the New Year (absent the patch), but I imagine that
instances of this would be rare. I just examined the XyWWWeb U2 from
this point of view, and only a handful out of some 50 
statements had to be changed -- which, by the way, I've now done.
Hence, with the latest release (v077), the Jumbo U2 is now officially
"Y2K ready" regardless whether the updated EXEcutables are installed.

P.S. Nathan, I'm glad to hear that you *couldn't* care less. "Could
care less" seems to be ascendant nowadays, and I must say it gets on
my nerves. What's that supposed to mean, anyhow? That one's degree
of concern is so asymptotically close to zero that any further decline
would be practically meaningless? I don't think so!

--------------
Carl Distefano
CLDistefano@xxxxxxxx
http://users.datarealm.com/xywwweb/