On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 4:14pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I think he is thinking of the five-character limit in the original >> linker(s) used to develop Unix (which very well may have come from >> Multics). That five-character limit gave us the infamous creat(2) system >> call. > > Hmmmm, I don't believe that's correct either. I remember a discussion > with either Brian Kernighan or Dennis Ritchie, who, when asked what he > would do different if he had a chance to go back and change anything in > UNIX, stated, "I'd spell creat(2) with an 'e' on the end".[1]
I believe it was Ken Thompson, and I believe the remark was intended to be humorous. Step back and ask: Why would he spell "create" as "creat" in the first place? If you are going to type five characters, you might as well type six. The reason it was spelled "creat" in the first place was the linked only supported five characters. That has caused much head-scratching, question-asking, and recompiling-due-to-typos; hence the remark about the spelling. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
