Pat Farrell wrote:I thought about the bogus year idea, but most Date implementations start in 1970, and even I am older than that.
Rationally, the separate month/day/year fields should be integers, which makes testing for null a bit of a challenge.
Pat Farrell wrote:Obscure Trivia on dates and calendars, the Russian Czars did not like the Gregorian Calendar, so they kept on a separate one, I think Julian based, up until the Communists came in during the Russian Revolution, and then the new Government switched to the Gregorian Calendar. So Months and dates in the early 1900s don't map well to our current thinking.
Mike Simmons wrote: I do want to acknowledge that GregorianCalendar has some very complex yet very robust code, that handles many of these issues for us. ....- and they're a substantial improvement over what most programmers might have cobbled together on their own, if they didn't have a standard library to fall back on.
Pat Farrell wrote: I assume that by 2100, whoever is programming will have a very robust Calendar library that even knows about Martian and Klingon calendars.
Pat Farrell wrote:I can as easily use 1896.
Rob Prime wrote:But there are still people around on this world who are born in the 19th century.