At 10:26 AM -0800 4/8/99, Sudipta Ghose wrote:
>I was following the quite interesting Y2K bug thread, and decided to
>look around myself. Here is what I found:
Bravo!
I applaud you as one of the few who can ignore the hype and the opinions,
and go look at the APIs with an eye towards solving the problem. Want to
come work here?
--Bob
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? krollin
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Laurence Lundblade
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Kenneth Albanowski
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Sudipta Ghose
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Mark Nudelman
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Chris Antos
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Michael Yam
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Chris Antos
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Bob Ebert
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Ray Rodrick
- RE: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Matthew D Moss
- RE: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Steve Patt
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- RE: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- RE: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Aaron Ardiri
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Kenneth Albanowski
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Chris Antos
- Re: y2k bug inherent in DateType? Christopher Hunt
