From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V8 #481 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Saturday, January 1 2000 Volume 08 : Number 481 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Banane, hein! [overbury@cn.ca] Re: Banane, hein! [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Re: Happy New Year ["James Hadfield" ] Re: Banane, hein! [Bayard ] Randi Schergold ["Scott Hunter McCleary" ] thoughts on the passing century [Eb ] Happy New Year ["Orrling, August" ] y2k? [Jeff Dwarf ] A real Y2K bug! [overbury@cn.ca] Re: A real Y2K bug! [Capuchin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:33:02 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Banane, hein! So what do we call the first decade? After the Nineties comes ????? Banane, hein a tous nos feg(ge)s antipodean(ne)s! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:39:53 EST From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: Banane, hein! In a message dated 12/31/99 8:30:24 AM, overbury@cn.ca writes: << So what do we call the first decade? After the Nineties comes ????? >> Yeah, this one really bugs me! The 2000's? The Zeroes? The double-oughts? The "fin-de-siecle era"? Hmm . . . - -----Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 17:24:36 GMT From: "James Hadfield" Subject: Re: Happy New Year Happy New Year!! Here's hoping for a peacefully prosperous century ahead. Read thru the millenial issue of Rolling Stone last night and was particularly struck by the resonance of J Depp's, M. Stipe's, and M. Scorcese's comments... But hey, Boris Yelstin resigned - that's good news in itself... Cheers to everyone - don't kill a soul... ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:33:02 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Subject: Re: Banane, hein! On Fri, 31 Dec 1999 overbury@cn.ca wrote: > So what do we call the first decade? After the Nineties > comes ????? The Noughties! Or the naughty aughties... then we have the clean teens, the roaring twenties and the dirty thirties! > > Banane, hein a tous nos feg(ge)s antipodean(ne)s! yeah James, how does 2000 feel? Enough zeros for ya? this is gonna be a great decimal time unit... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:47:14 -0800 From: "Scott Hunter McCleary" Subject: Randi Schergold I spoke with her this noon. She seems to be doing somewhat better, though I suspect much of it is medication. Girl's got a lot of pain right now, but she puts up one hell of a front. To compound the ongoing misery, she's lost her address book and beseeches all fegs within the sound of these electrons to e-mail her their addresses and phone numbers. Send them along to twofangs@sympatico.ca. Thank you and Hpynuyr. Scott - ---------------- Sent from a WebBox - http://www.webbox.com FREE Web based Email, Files, Bookmarks, Calendar, People and Great Ways to Share them with Others! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 13:02:43 -0800 From: Eb Subject: thoughts on the passing century Ugh. Eb 1) Tom Waits/Bone Machine ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 15:23:35 +0100 From: "Orrling, August" Subject: Happy New Year ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 06:31:03 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: y2k? is it me, or did a lot of "crowds" shown on tv for the so-called millenium expose it as the new coke of new year's eves? and if so, wasn't that great? :) ===== "America's greatest natural resource, still, to this day, is the moron" --Martin Mull __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 10:40:49 -0500 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: A real Y2K bug! Yup! Perl's "localtime" function returns "100" as the year. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 11:52:34 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: A real Y2K bug! On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 overbury@cn.ca wrote: > Yup! Perl's "localtime" function returns "100" as > the year. Not quite. From perldoc -f localtime: Also, $year is the number of years since 1900, that is, $year is 123 in year 2023, and not simply the last two digits of the year. If you assume it is, then you create non-Y2K-compliant programs--and you wouldn't want to do that, would you? So, Ross, what we have here is expected behavior that can be misinterpreted by a program to create a Y2K bug. I suggest adding $year = $year + 1900 ; to your program. Byeeee. Je. - -- ______________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V8 #481 *******************************