🚀 go-pugleaf

The first question would be, why would you use a variant to store a date?  The
overhead cost of variants is astronomical.  Use a double and solve two (2)
problems.  Your date situation and the overhead hammering your causing using a
variant.

BTW, MS says that VB (no matter what version) uses Y2K compatible date
routines.

Gordon

In article <01bfa79b$a1ea0060$03ef98c3@novix>,
  "Tim Foster" <TimF@Romtec.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Can anyone help provide information on what the status of Year 2000
> compliance is concerning VB3 and VB4 16-bit apps (using Access 2
> databases).
>
> After some testing in a VB4 16-bit application, I'm fairly positive there
> is a problem reading dates into Variants (VB seems to be trimming the dates
> to Short Format), and so when the Year 2000 rollover occurs, the dates take
> on '20' as the century value if you read values back from the Variant.
>
> I could probably fix this by storing DateValues in a Double, but I'm
> wondering if the problem can be resolved in any other way, or if this is an
> 'official' problem.
>
> Any help will be much appreciated,
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Foster.
>


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading