Re: 1111111111

[fraktalisman]

I remember the millennium very well. During december I had been working on an ecological farm in Andalucia, Spain and when returning to Germany by bus in the early days of January 2000, the digital display at the Spanish bus station did not work. It had worked before.

I had gotten myself ready to come home and see my Windows 95 having expired. Of course, it hadn't. I found it even a bit disappointing that no millennium chaos had happened. I started learning perl shortly afterwards and was fascinated by the elegant way of the time function ... year+=1900 ... why not? Or maybe the elegance here lies within the system not within perl? I don't know, and luckily I don't have to care about 32 or 64 bit time format either.

Now some more years back in time, I stopped using Windows 3.11 (you can see, I'm not a UNIX type of guy at all, some Linux experiments not taken into account, I really used Commodore until 1990, DOS PC until 1995, Windows 3.1x until 1998) and I remember that on download sites there were mostly at least two versions of executables - 16bit and 32bit. To me, it's a reasonable and conscious decision to give a 64 bit function a new name, not the same name as the 32 bit version. If there is a program that expects 32 bit, it should either get 32 bit or an error message. But programmers should be easily aware which version they are using!