>Because it's not unreasonable to expect the coder to supply you with something which will not fail arbitrarily in 10 years for a reason which is 100% predictab

>Because it's not unreasonable to expect the coder to supply you with something which will not fail arbitrarily in 10 years for a reason which is 100% predictable. Really. A coder is supposed to know that he should spend unnecessary resources (memory, mainly) to add a feature that will be needed in ten years for a program only expected to be used for five years? Most of the problems (that didn't happen is it turned out) with Y2K were because many programs that were expected to be replaced weren't. And before the mid 1990s RAM was seriously expensive, people did not buy more than necessary, "Just in Case".