[comp.unix.questions] History: foo and fubar are unrelated

editor@chinet.UUCP (Alex Zell) (09/27/87)

 
Everyone has heard of "Manhattan Project."  One sees that reference
in newspaper stories about the "atomic bomb" of WW2, in magazine articles,
and even here on the net, the domain of the most knowledgeable and
sophisticated people (ask us) on the planet.  The time has come to correct
that usage, because "Manhattan Project" never existed.
   
  There was a project labeled officially "Manhattan Engineering District,"
usually shortened in most documents to "Manhattan District."
   I bring this up because it is another example of historical revisionism
resulting from carelessness in checking original sources, or just careless
dissemination of information from less than authoritative sources.
 
  Thus it is with "fubar" and "foo."  
 
  In the early days of WW2, newspapers were full of feature stories about
the experiences of civilians in a new culture, the military service. 
A notable aspect of that culture was its virtually entirely
male constituency, and the development and use of language in that 
environment.  (Yes, there were the WAACS (later WACS) and WAVES and the
service organizations, USO, Salvation Army, Red Cross, but they accounted
for an insignificant proportion of females within the ambience of the
military establishment of the day.)
 
  The stories told of servicemen returning home on furlough and asking Mom
to "pass the <*******> butter."  I never did understand why the language of
barracks was considered any worse than the language of the shop (also at the
time dominated by males), but that is not an issue here.  
  
  A popular subject of the stories was the language of the military, and
the etymology of certain words, phrases and abbreviations.  "GI" came in
for much discussion.  The usual explanation was "government issue," although
some writers stretched for more fanciful sources.  Another was "jeep."
Debate was rather heavy on that, but consensus was that it was derived from
"general purpose" ---> gp  ---> jeep.  The official name of the thing was
"truck, 1/4 ton, 4 by 4," if memory is faithful.
  
  High priority was given to the study of "snafu."  At one of its first
appearances in public print in 1942 no newspaper would have dared print
the meaning of the acronym: "Situation normal, all fucked up."  Most stories
used the expression "fouled" and let it go at that.  Some even dared to
suggest coyly that "fouled" was a euphemism for another word -- not even
suggesting that the "other word" began with the same letter.
  Later on came competitive attempts in searching for better and funnier 
acronyms to describe the condition of the services.  "Fubar" came on the
scene soon, and later (I was in Camp Shelby, Miss. at the time) I broke 
up when somebody suggested "fubarso."  The appended "so" stood for "see
overlay," directing attention to the overlay, a transparency to be placed
over a map.  For some reason "fubarso" never gained much popularity....
----
So what has all this to do with "foo?"
Nothing.  The two expressions were totally unrelated in their origins.
The use of "foo" in computerology was initiated simultaneously by many
hundreds of computerists.
  
When we first received our IMSAI-8080 without disk drives, and with a 
defective copy of ALOS-8, we entered  programs by front panel paddles.
One would read the list while another did the entries.  
Whenever I came to an entry such as "B000" or "F000" I would pronounce
"boo" or "foo"  and would be corrected by son Pete: "No, you should
always spell it out "ef-zero-zero-zero" or we may end up with errors."
(You have no idea how rigid very young teenagers can be.  "What's right
is right.")
***
  "Foo" is not a new word.  "Foo" and its cognates, "pfui" in German and 
many other languages, and "fooey" in English, are well established. Its
use in English seems still to be unrecognized by lexicographers, but "pfui"
is found in a 1914 edition of Muret-Sanders German-English dictionary which
gives "pish!, faugh, ugh, few, fie" but does not offer "fooey" or "foo,"
an oversight which I am sure will be corrected when U.S. lexicographers
bring it up at least to "vulg." or "cant," and perhaps some day even 
"slang" or "informal."
  Yep, I do recall "foo" sprinkled in Smoky Stover cartoons.  Indicates 
that it was in use before WW2.
 
-- 
Alex Zell                                     ihnp4!chinet!editor
I'd rather be on Pictou Island, N.S.

roberts@cognos.uucp (Robert Stanley) (10/07/87)

In article <1632@chinet.UUCP> editor@chinet.UUCP (Alex Zell) writes:

>So what has all this to do with "foo?"
>Nothing.  The two expressions were totally unrelated in their origins.
>The use of "foo" in computerology was initiated simultaneously by many
>hundreds of computerists.
  
>When we first received our IMSAI-8080 without disk drives, and with a 
>defective copy of ALOS-8, we entered  programs by front panel paddles.
>One would read the list while another did the entries.  
>Whenever I came to an entry such as "B000" or "F000" I would pronounce
>"boo" or "foo"  and would be corrected by son Pete: "No, you should
>always spell it out "ef-zero-zero-zero" or we may end up with errors."
>(You have no idea how rigid very young teenagers can be.  "What's right
>is right.")

This is the first posting to have appeared in this topic which has tackled
the problem of WHY these words became ubiquitous.  I think the tale of using
panel switches points at least in part to the reason, but there is more.

Levy's book "Hackers" is probably the best reference for the early days of
computing, particularly at the MIT AI Lab, and it revealed the underlying
roots of many mysteries.  It also pointed up the salient characteristics of
those same hackers, from whose work has sprung so much of today's computing
mythology.

LISP is one of those languages which absolutely requires the programmer to
keep handy a number of re-usable symbolic references.  The only properties
of these references are that they must be memorable, interchangeable but not
likely to be confused in the heat of the moment and, above all else, easy to
type.  The choice of particular monosyllables is probably attributable to the
keyboard habits of the local guru.  My own choice has, for many years, been
'fred', which is a cycle of four keys under my frequently idle left index
finger.  To the best of my knowledge, 'fred' has never been an acronym for
anything in my computing career, nor do I use 'fred' as a generic personal
reference, it is simply a conveniently mnemonic symbolic reference.

Within any community, certain traits/habits are likely to be reduced to
standard ritual which, after a certain elapsed time become just the way
things are.  So, it would seem, with 'foo', 'bar', 'baz' etc.  It is
interesting to note that the ritual UNIX name 'junk' also lies moderately
easily under a single finger of the right hand on the keyboard....

If anyone wants an interesting psychology project, perhaps they can poll
active programmers for their preferred private symbolic references....

-- 
Robert Stanley           Cognos Incorporated     S-mail: P.O. Box 9707
Voice: (613) 738-1440 (Research: there are 2!)           3755 Riverside Drive 
  FAX: (613) 738-0002    Compuserve: 76174,3024          Ottawa, Ontario 
 uucp: decvax!utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!roberts          CANADA  K1G 3Z4

mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti) (10/11/87)

In article <1539@cognos.UUCP> roberts@cognos.UUCP (Robert Stanley) writes:

>       The choice of particular monosyllables is probably attributable to the
>keyboard habits of the local guru.  My own choice has, for many years, been
>'fred', which is a cycle of four keys under my frequently idle left index
>finger.

I, too, use fred, and, unless it was subliminally supplied to me, thought
that I had made this up myself.  I had used it for years, and then began to
discover that *MANY* others use it as well!  This never fails to amaze me!

Sorry to waste bandwidth for something so trivial, but, as I said, I am
amazed!  I would also be interested in other's favorites along these lines.

-- 
===================================================================
Michael Kesti		Grass Valley Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 1114   	Grass Valley, CA  95945
UUCP:	...!tektronix!gvgpsa!gvgspd!mrk

edward@engr.uky.edu (Edward C. Bennett) (10/12/87)

In article <313@gvgspd.UUCP> mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti) writes:
]In article <1539@cognos.UUCP> roberts@cognos.UUCP (Robert Stanley) writes:
]>       The choice of particular monosyllables is probably attributable to the
]>keyboard habits of the local guru.  My own choice has, for many years, been
]>'fred', which is a cycle of four keys under my frequently idle left index
]>finger.
]I, too, use fred, and, unless it was subliminally supplied to me, thought
]that I had made this up myself.  I had used it for years, and then began to
]discover that *MANY* others use it as well!  This never fails to amaze me!

I've used 'fred' as a throwaway name for years now. The origin of my
reasoning can be seen when you consider some of the other names that
I use. e.g. Barney, Betty, Wilma...etc. ;-)

-- 
Edward C. Bennett				DOMAIN: edward@engr.uky.edu
						UUCP: cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward
"Goodnight M.A."				BITNET: edward%ukecc.uucp@ukma
	"He's become a growling, snarling white-hot mass of canine terror"

jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum) (10/14/87)

In article <1539@cognos.UUCP>, roberts@cognos.uucp (Robert Stanley) writes:
> In article <1632@chinet.UUCP> editor@chinet.UUCP (Alex Zell) writes:
> 
> >So what has all this to do with "foo?"
> >Nothing.  The two expressions were totally unrelated in their origins.
> >The use of "foo" in computerology was initiated simultaneously by many
> >hundreds of computerists.
>   
> >When we first received our IMSAI-8080 without disk drives, and with a 
> >defective copy of ALOS-8, we entered  programs by front panel paddles.
> >One would read the list while another did the entries.  
>
> My own choice has, for many years, been
> 'fred', which is a cycle of four keys under my frequently idle left index
> finger.  To the best of my knowledge, 'fred' has never been an acronym for
> anything in my computing career, nor do I use 'fred' as a generic personal
> reference, it is simply a conveniently mnemonic symbolic reference.
> 
> It is
> interesting to note that the ritual UNIX name 'junk' also lies moderately
> easily under a single finger of the right hand on the keyboard....
> 

This person is obviously not a touch typist.  Fred is under two fingers
as is junk.  Also, I disagree with the guy before that.  I have seen computer
texts dated pre-1974 (1972?) with references to MUMBLE.FOO , FOOBAR.DAT
and all manner of other file names.  The common item being, 6 letters in
the file name and three in the file extension (no, that's file TYPE, not
EXTENSION ;-)

If fuzzy memory serves correctly, all of the machines I saw with names like
this wre restricted to 9 letter file names.  It seems only normal to what
to use the full 9 letters ...

FOOBAR, or so I heard, was a 6 letter hack on FUBAR, the original of which
is well known.  FOO's meaning only comes from FOOBAR, mostly since I do
recall FOO pre-dates the 8008.  If I remember (which you may have figured
I really never do ;-) correctly, the IMSAI and ALTOS machines were
octal in the beginning.  (Actually, I don't think they were anything.  Didn't
they just have a switch registers and LED's above each paddle?)

On to the world of FRED.

F.R.E.D. is an anacronym.  It's also the name of every computer you every
didn't like.  It stands for (blush) Fucking Ridiculous Electronic Device.
As the founder of `The Internation Brotherhood of Freds' (Local 13),
I can vouche for that.

- John.
-- 
John F. Haugh II		HECI Exploration Co. Inc.
UUCP:	...!ihnp4!killer!jfh	11910 Greenville Ave, Suite 600
"Don't Have an Oil Well?"	Dallas, TX. 75243
" ... Then Buy One!"		(214) 231-0993

gk@kksys.UUCP (Greg Kemnitz) (10/16/87)

In article <1810@killer.UUCP> jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes:
>recall FOO pre-dates the 8008.  If I remember (which you may have figured
>I really never do ;-) correctly, the IMSAI and ALTOS machines were
>octal in the beginning.  (Actually, I don't think they were anything.  Didn't
>they just have a switch registers and LED's above each paddle?)

I assume you are referring to IMSAI and ALTAIR, rather than IMSAI and ALTOS.

The ALTAIR front panel was originally designed with octal in mind --
the switches were grouped in threes, rather than fours.  When IMSAI
released their machine, they went with larger paddle switches
physically grouped in eights, but color coded in groups of four.  This
made hex to binary conversions easier on the poor soul who had to
bit-flip in their four thousand byte program.

Most ALTAIR owners I know eventually masked off their front panel in
groups of four to achieve this same convenience.
-- 
Greg Kemnitz              |   amdahl \
K and K Systems           |   ihnp4   !meccts!kksys!gk
P.O. Box 41804            |   rutgers/
Plymouth, MN  55441-0804  |  AT&T and clones: (612)475-1527

frank@zen.UUCP (Frank Wales) (10/17/87)

In article <313@gvgspd.UUCP> mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti) writes:
>In article <1539@cognos.UUCP> roberts@cognos.UUCP (Robert Stanley) writes:
>>My own choice has, for many years, been 'fred', which is a cycle of
>>four keys under my frequently idle left index finger.
>I, too, use fred, and, unless it was subliminally supplied to me, thought
>that I had made this up myself.  I had used it for years, and then began to
>discover that *MANY* others use it as well!  This never fails to amaze me!

"fred" is the number one random file name here too; others in common use
are "bert" (?), "blip" (??), and "bill" and "dave" (guess whose equipment
we use).  As far as I know, *nobody* here use "foo".


Frank Wales,              [frank@zen.uucp<->uunet!mcvax!ukc!zen.co.uk!frank]
Zengrange Ltd, Greenfield Rd, Leeds, ENGLAND, LS9 8DB. (+44) 532 489048 x220.

allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) (10/17/87)

As quoted from <313@gvgspd.UUCP> by mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti):
+---------------
| In article <1539@cognos.UUCP> roberts@cognos.UUCP (Robert Stanley) writes:
| >       The choice of particular monosyllables is probably attributable to the
| >keyboard habits of the local guru.  My own choice has, for many years, been
| >'fred', which is a cycle of four keys under my frequently idle left index
| >finger.
| 
| I, too, use fred, and, unless it was subliminally supplied to me, thought
| that I had made this up myself.  I had used it for years, and then began to
| discover that *MANY* others use it as well!  This never fails to amaze me!
+---------------

My friends tell me that I'm the only two-fingered typist they know who can
outtype a 10-fingered typist.  ;-)  Anyway, my personal throwaway is "gorp",
which is easily typed with alternating hands....
-- 
	    Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc
  {{harvard,mit-eddie}!necntc,well!hoptoad,sun!mandrill!hal}!ncoast!allbery
ARPA: necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.harvard.edu  Fido: 157/502  MCI: BALLBERY
   <<ncoast Public Access UNIX: +1 216 781 6201 24hrs. 300/1200/2400 baud>>
	"Just one word, Data:  _it_didn't_happen_!" - Tasha Yar

patc@tekcrl.TEK.COM (Pat Caudill) (10/18/87)

In article <417@kksys.UUCP> gk@kksys.UUCP (Greg Kemnitz) writes:
>The ALTAIR front panel was originally designed with octal in mind --
>the switches were grouped in threes, rather than fours.  When IMSAI
>released their machine, they went with larger paddle switches
>physically grouped in eights, but color coded in groups of four.

	The build instructions for the IMSAI front panel said you could
do it any way you wanted. They just gave you 8 red switches and 8 blue
ones which would all fit next to each other. The directions said it most
of your code to toggle in was octal to arrange them in groups of three
but if it was hex to put groups of four. Nearly every one used groups
of four though.

		Pat Caudill
		patc@tekcrl

P.S. Mine is still being used but I get blank looks when I tell
peoble at the local computer store what kind of computer I have.

gib@unirot.UUCP (the gibster) (10/25/87)

After a recent poll at my home site [the kiosk, not on the net yet] I found
that the most popular random file names are (in order): fred, FRED, sam,
junk, and crap.  

mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic) (10/26/87)

In article <516@unirot.UUCP> gib@unirot.UUCP (the gibster) writes:
>After a recent poll at my home site [the kiosk, not on the net yet] I found
>that the most popular random file names are (in order): fred, FRED, sam,
>junk, and crap.  

What, no ``asdf'' or ``qwer'' which happen to be my favorite two.
I'll give anyone $5 if they can type any other four letter word 
with each key not located adjacent of each other faster than I can type
``asdf''.    I've noticed that people around here usually use
``foo'' and ``bar'' more for example data types than filenames.

fnf@mcdsun.UUCP (Fred Fish) (10/26/87)

In article <7640@ism780c.UUCP> mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>What, no ``asdf'' or ``qwer'' which happen to be my favorite two.
>I'll give anyone $5 if they can type any other four letter word 
>with each key not located adjacent of each other faster than I can type
>``asdf''.    I've noticed that people around here usually use

How about ``ffff''?  I can type about 20 of those in 3 seconds :-)
Of course, whether or not 'f' is adjacent to itself or not is debatable.
BTW, my prefered junkfile name is 'junk', NOT 'fred'.

-Fred



-- 
# Fred Fish    hao!noao!mcdsun!fnf    (602) 438-3614
# Motorola Computer Division, 2900 S. Diablo Way, Tempe, Az 85282  USA

chou@husc2.UUCP (chou) (10/26/87)

In article <7640@ism780c.UUCP> mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>with each key not located adjacent of each other faster than I can type
>``asdf''.    I've noticed that people around here usually use
>``foo'' and ``bar'' more for example data types than filenames.


The bet is on.  I always use "thid" since I've found that two hands are better
than one.
--Luyen Chou
The Harvard Core Corps

mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic) (10/27/87)

In article <1322@husc2.UUCP> chou@husc2.UUCP (luyen chou) writes:
>In article <7640@ism780c.UUCP> mikep@ism780c.UUCP (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>>with each key not located adjacent of each other faster than I can type
>>``asdf''.    I've noticed that people around here usually use
>>``foo'' and ``bar'' more for example data types than filenames.
>
>
>The bet is on.  I always use "thid" since I've found that two hands are better
>than one.
>--Luyen Chou
>The Harvard Core Corps


Right.  Except in this case.  I can arrange my fingers of my left
hand so that it takes one motion for me to hit a-s-d-f.   That beats
both ``ffff'' and ``thid''.  Try it, if you're skeptical.  The
4-f sequence needs 4 motions to produce (also leads to a possibly
confusing situation:  ``Is that 8 f's or 9?'').  Likewise,
``thid'' needs four contacts, although it's probably a lot quicker
than ``ffff''.  I can see where an experienced THID typer can
approach the speed of an experienced ASDF typer, but never surpass
him.  Unless of course, the guy only had two fingers on his left
hand, then there might be a chance.

However, if you're skeptical, you can fly out here and we'll test
it.  Both on the same terminals (not the paper-tty types) and we'll
see.  Should come in the summer, though, many more sights...

-MikeP
{sdcrdcf|attunix|microsoft|sfmin}!ism780c!mikep

ps - notice that this is crossposted to talk.bizarre and
followups are directed there.  It hasn't gotten wild enough
to go into alt.flame, but we can keep on trying.