Re: Y0K YEAR000 BETWEEN STATEMENT
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 23:28:07 +0100
Message-ID: <7jk592$f1m$1_at_news6.svr.pol.co.uk>
Van Nieuwenhuyse <van_nieuwenhuyse_luytens_at_online.be> wrote in message
news:F4155D9F9AA4D111B9990020AFBA52D5173E7D_at_ftp.sfi-software.com...
> Don't worry guys, it 's a bug introduced in Oracle 6.3, and still there,
and
> no intentions from Oracle to correct it.
> They simply don't accept the year 0, although there's a hole between the
> julian dates for the year 0.
1 BC is immediately followed by 1 AD. Honest. There is no year Zero and never has been. This is mainly because when the current calendar was invented (in the 400s, I think), the concept of 0 was not fully development in Western mathematics (which was still doing maths using Roman Numberals).
So the first millenium started, according to the current calendar, on 1 Jan Year 1 (which is why the next millenium actually starts on 1 Jan 2001, and not 1 Jan 2000).
Simon Hedges
Glouceester
UK
Received on Wed Jun 09 1999 - 00:28:07 CEST