[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
SEUL: About the directory concept. About Unix names.
THere is an argument in progress about Unix names being
counterintuitive. Well Brian Kernighan tells in "The Unix programming
environment" why the Unix names are so short they make poor mnemonics:
the reason was than the Unix programmers disliked typing (and don't
forget than editing facilities in basic sh are poor) so they choose ls
instead of dir, cp instead of copy, rm instead of del.
So there is no divine reason Unix names are like they are. Of course
compatibilty prevents changing them.
But it will not matter so much if we provide tools allowing only a
minimal use of command line. And we can use aliases to provide the
user with more intuitive names.
The directory concept.
Directories allow you to sort things together: your maths separated
from your mail to the Internal Revenue Service. They are a USEFUL
concept and no OS designed since 1980 has prescinded of them.
DOS started with a flat filesystem like CP/M but that was rectified as
soon as DOS 2.0. Macs have them. So we have an OS renowned for its
user friendliness who uses this concept.
The people who put all their files in the root dir (under DOS) are the
kind of people who are too lazy for spending one minute creating a
directory and will later spend one hour searching frantically where is
that letter to IRS.
And about those not understanding the directory concept: when you are
moving to a new appartment you put your things in boxes and sometimes
for better classifying you put small boxes in big boxes.
But it is better for a user to bleed now a little with the directory
concept than bleed its entire life with flat filesystems. Ah! in my
box there is about FIFTY THOUSAND files (do a df -i for knowing how
much you have).
Jean Francois Martinez
==================== The Linux. Use the Linux, Luke! =======================