Hi All,

Stigers, Gregory - ANDOVER wrote:
>              Which leads us to a MAJOR question: If we are building long
> years with HPCENTURY and HPYEAR, what will HPYEAR equal in 200#? Will it
> have the leading zero(s) or not? To do so would be welcome, but also it
> would be inconsistent with HPMONTH and HPDAY, and probably an
> enhancement.

  Along the lines of HPMONTH and HPDAY, HPYEAR would be # for 200#. I do not
  think we want to change the return type from integer to string to return
  '0#' for 200#.

  I agree that as of today, 5.5 HPYEAR returns 100 for 2000. But, it will be
  fixed in next release.

Stigers rightly captured the discussion:
> The consensus seems to be to give us the long year with a short name. A
> few want a full date spec as well. A couple want the HPYEAR to be the
> long year, but several posters noted that this would trash their current
> work.

>                                            Reviewing the vars, they are
> composed of real words or abbreviations that are standard within the 3K
> community, so I suggest that HPCCYY or HPYYYY would stick out like a
> sore thumb.

Suggestions for 4-digit year falls into

 HPYYYY       Votes:10  (HPYYYY:5, HPCCYY:2, HPYEAR4:1,
                        any-4-digit year var: 2)
 HPYYYYMMDD   Votes:7  (HPYYYYMMDD:6, HPCCYYMMDD:1)

Other suggestions are  HPYEAR (as 4-digit Year), HPLONGYEAR, HPFULLYEAR,
HPYEARF, HPCENTURY and  ccyymmdd hh:mm:ss.ms.

Hence, I am considering HPYYYY variable for implementation and if time
permits I will add HPYYYYMMDD too.

> I see the usefulness of a calendar week of the year; Julian day could be
> useful as well.

FYI:  The new date intrinsics (proposal will be available for discussion
      by 11/27) have mechanism to return dates in various formats including
      YYYYMMDD. However, I agree that it would restrict only to programmetic
      access.

Thank your very much for all your suggestions.

regards,

Gopi ([log in to unmask])
CSY R&D India, Bangalore.