On 06/15/2011 02:44 PM, Steven Abner wrote:
> Hi,
> First sorry to bother, second thank you for providing source code worthy of
> a good
> shake down, third, arghhh, using negative years I found the return value to
> be off.
>
> Using "%V/%u/%010G", which was the flag and field we matched,
> a
Hi,
First sorry to bother, second thank you for providing source code worthy of a
good
shake down, third, arghhh, using negative years I found the return value to be
off.
Using "%V/%u/%010G", which was the flag and field we matched,
and creating a struct of Jan 1 dates, the return value differ
