Adrian Hey wrote:
> On Wed 09 Jun, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
> > ... and , if you are already here,...
> > could somebody explain, please, what does it mean to have a compiler
> > which is *NOT* y2k compliant,
>
> I have found that some compilers put the date and time of compilation in the
> resulting object files, so it is possible that such a complier might suffer
> a Y2K problem, even on a Y2K compliant OS.
>
> [...]
>
> This can be a real pain if you're working under a QA system that demands that
> software builds are repeatable (I.E. they will always generate the byte for
> byte identical object files, given the same sources). I suppose this is true
> whether or not the the compiler is Y2K compliant,
It's hard to see how this can really be a Y2K issue. If the compiler
puts the compilation time / date in the object file, then recompilation
will not produce an identical result no matter what date format is
used (unless it's so coarse-grained that you can do multiple
compilations before it changes).
-- jd
