On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 8:00 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote: > >> Am I missing something? > > The original complaint, which has been repeatedly sidestepped, is > that instead of just calling it a bug, they said that it was "by > design". My point is that even if something is working the way it was > designed, it can still be a bug. Lots of text has been thrown about > explaining why it works the way it does, but it still ignores the fact > that it is cowardly and annoying for them to insist that this isn't a > bug. > > Hey, anyone remember Y2K? That was most definitely "by design", and > there were very good efficiency reasons that dates were stored the way > they were. But it was still a bug: dates have century components. And > 256+ character-long strings can be cast to upper case. -----------------------------------
There you go again getting picky. ;-> -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
