CPU is so standard as to be usable in Star Trek and Terminator II; I
would expect that CPUName is closer to intuitive, whereas YYYY is
programmer jargon. I guess I should mention that I got my BA in
Linguistics (great career choice, that; me and the history and English
majors are all hot tickets), and took a semester / seminar in American
English where we did study slang & jargon. That, in addition to being a
COBOL programmer, and following the YEAR2000 problem, kind of make this
a raw nerve. It is HPMonth, not HPMM. HPYYYY is inconsistent. And
HPSUSAN is an acronym for System Unique Assigned Serial Number. YYYY is
no acronym; it is COBOLese.

>----------
>From:  Stan Sieler[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent:  Monday, November 25, 1996 3:17 PM
>To:    Stigers, Gregory - ANDOVER
>Cc:    [log in to unmask]
>Subject:       Re: HPYYYY and HPYYYYMMDD (was Re: Proposal for new HPCENTURY
>
>> I implore you to examine the naming convention and BE CONSISTENT! HPYYYY
>> is unlike any other HPVar; it is not a word. This fails the classic test
>> for naming clarity: can you read the code to someone over the phone and
>> have it make sense? How would you read HPYYYY?
>
>HPCPUNAME isn't a "word" either (i.e., the "CPUNAME" portion").  CPU
>is an acronym.
>
>For that matter, we have variable "names" that don't mean anything
>obvious already:  HPSUSAN.
>
>> Here's a thought: put together a ballot, and let us order the names by
>> preference. Me, I could live with HPYEAR4, since it is at least
>> meaningful, and meets the list's voiced preference for a short name. Who
>> at HP sets these standards anyway?
>
>YEAR4 will be just as obscure over the phone...YEARFOUR? YEARFOR?
>(and, for the golfers, YEARFORE).
>
>I prefer HPYYYY mostly because it tells me the format of the data:
>a year in 4 digits.
>
>--
>Stan Sieler                                          [log in to unmask]
>                                     http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html
>