Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BGB <cr88192@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 13:02:45 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <vur4fm$2c2qa$1@dont-email.me>
References: <87y0wjaysg.fsf@gmail.com> <vt1a7f$i5jd$1@dont-email.me>
 <vti36r$g4nu$2@dont-email.me>
 <slrnvvqhmc.2eh69.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <vtjknt$1sp26$1@dont-email.me> <vtk2f9$295ku$2@dont-email.me>
 <vtka7u$2ddeu$1@dont-email.me> <CNtLP.2611170$TBhc.2589292@fx16.iad>
 <vtm71q$78l6$3@dont-email.me> <87plhd0z76.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <slrnvvvdch.3gc99.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <87cydb28gu.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <S2ULP.1346551$BrX.394554@fx12.iad>
 <vup5d4$fjmk$1@dont-email.me>
 <slrn1010nl6.2t91c.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <vupnq4$tbfj$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 20:06:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="09d58e1b5b746c5300691aad140a213a";
	logging-data="2493258"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18BvheVVWZ++DeDg6WimOjpCt+4JjKkGB8="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:E3EWxAdzZtpBybh7eUrR51pz6NQ=
In-Reply-To: <vupnq4$tbfj$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3793

On 4/29/2025 12:24 AM, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 4/29/25 01:10, candycanearter07 wrote:
> ...
>> I believe the current rule for software is to consider "39" the cutoff,
>> ie 39 is considered 2039, and 40 is considered 1940. I agree though,
>> removing the century is a bad idea for anything that is supposed to be
>> kept for a length of time.
> 
> I sincerely doubt that there is any unique current rule for interpreting
> two-digit year numbers - just a wide variety of different rules used by
> different people for different purposes. That's part of the reason why
> it's a bad idea to rely upon such rules.

Could always argue for a compromise, say, 1 signed byte year.
   Say: 1872 to 2127, if origin is 2000.
Could also be 2 digits if expressed in hexadecimal.

Or, maybe 1612 BC to 5612 AD if the year were 2 digits in Base 85.
   Or, 48 BC to 4048 AD with Base 64.


Downside of any 2-digit decimal year scheme is that it would either need 
constant fiddling to remain usable, or need to be defined in a way that 
is relative to the time in which it is observed, say, +/- 50 years.

So, if we assume +/-50, say, at the moment it would span: 1975 to 2074.


Well, and all those "Summer of '69" covers would be interpreted as 2069.
Well, and annoyances of music lyrics bingo card:
   Songs with nostalgic stories of decades past;
   Songs about California and/or locations in California;
   Songs about music creation stuff;
     ("Like, no man, don't be singin' 'bout your DAW and mix levels", *1)
   ...

Some of this starts getting kinda old sometimes.

*1: No, not a reflection of my actual dialect, where the *ing to *in' 
shift and similar isn't really a thing (but, it is a common pattern in 
the dialect typically used on TV and in music).


Or, like, fiction stories where the protagonist is always either a 
struggling author or starving artist that gets caught up in 
something-or-another.
Well, or if the protagonist is a programmer or hacker or similar, and 
most of the character names end up being either culture references or 
puns (less common, but still a pattern).

Then again, maybe this is just the way things are...

....