mel@pegasus.UUCP (03/23/84)
Come on guys. If you want + to mean set and - unset (rather than
UNIX's - as a flag char.), you should go on and have name::=value
(or is that name=::value - whatever ALGOL wants). After all, this
is an assignment, not an assertion. If you are going for purity, go
all the way.
Wasn't there a presentation on the "new" standard at the Uniforum
Conference? I was under the impression that we UNIX jocks won out
over all you IBM'ers.
Mel Haas , houxe!melidallen@watmath.UUCP (03/23/84)
X
If you are going for purity, go all the way.
I was under the impression that we UNIX jocks won out over all you IBM'ers.
Mel Haas , houxe!mel
I wasn't going for purity. I suggest the syntax and the use of full
words because I think it's easier to learn and remember. Ain't nobody
gonna "win" if you think it's UNIX jocks against IBM'ers. I've not
been on an IBM machine in years. I grew up on a Waterloo version of
the Honeywell GCOS system. For the past N years I've lived on UNIX.
I don't care what (we) UNIX jocks use for our daily command language. We
can write shell scripts and aliases to abbreviate and hack and turn any
command language into our own. As head consultant for two Waterloo UNIX
machines supporting several hundred staff and students, I do wish that
the documentation, commands and syntax of this machine had been designed
to be *learned* and *remembered* instead of just *used*.
--
-IAN! (Ian! D. Allen) University of Waterloo