andree@uokvax.UUCP (12/08/83)
#R:umcp-cs:-417100:uokvax:1800008:000:660 uokvax!andree Dec 6 08:35:00 1983 No, long names are not forcing people to use aliases, especially if (as previously suggested) the system provides abbreviations. Hence, you might have `List_current_directory' as a `full' name for something, and `lc' as the system-supplied abbreviation. No aliases required, and you have a command that is as short and terse as Unix. As for associating short nonsense commands with actions, I agree that there is no problem - as long as you use 1 system. If you regularly use two or more systems, each of which has a seperate set of nonsense commands, you very quickly go gibbering (or at least I do. I quit using vi because of such considerations). <mike
bcn@mit-eddie.UUCP (Clifford Neuman) (12/10/83)
Well, short names are not always the right thing. Especially if one uses
several systems where the same short name means different things. The
best example of this is the cd command on UNIX vs. the cd command on MULTICS.
On UNIX cd stands for change directory. I use UNIX quite frequently, and
have become very used to this convention. CD is also a short name for
connect (which changes ones directory) on the MIT versions of TOPS-20. On
Multics, however, cd is short for create_directory. One side effect of
create directory is that if the directory specified already exists, and if
that directory has another name (Multics allows multiple names for files), the
name specified is deleted as an addname for the old directory, and a new
directory with that name is created. This means that typing "cd {dir name}"
can result in its name being deleted from an existing directory.
The first time I did this, it took me 10 minutes to figure out and fix the
damage. Now that I know, I still find myself doing the same thing since
I am so conditioned to cd as change directory.
BTW, cwd (change_worrking_directory) is the multics command to change ones
directory. Also, please don't send flames to the effect that Multics
existed first. I realize that, but it doesn't make the problem any less
annoying.
~ Cliff
{decvax!genrad,ihnp4}!mit-eddie!bcn.UUCP
BCN@MIT-MC.ARPAandree@uokvax.UUCP (12/11/83)
#R:umcp-cs:-417100:uokvax:1800011:000:895 uokvax!andree Dec 9 12:42:00 1983 /***** uokvax:net.cog-eng / sdcsvax!davidson / 8:46 am Dec 5, 1983 */ If a user knows a command, they will want to enter it in as abbreviated fashion as possible, and aside from the question of how they learned it, they will be better off with short names. -Greg /* ---------- */ Greg, speak for yourself. I don't want to enter commands in the most abbreviated fashion as possible. For example, on VMS I always use the `type' command, even though `t' is a perfectly valid abbreviation. The reason is that the time to mentally translate `type' to `t' is longer than the time it takes me to type `type'. The other case in which abbreviations are undesirable is in a command script. I invariable use the full form of the VMS commands, parameters and qualifiers in scripts, as this makes it MUCH clearer what is going on. The other systems I use don't have this option, unfortunately. <mike