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 >