From: "Mike Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 7/30/07, Matt Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, the syntax for dd is a bit weird. This is because of Hysterical > > Raisins, AFAICT. > from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility": > 'Hysterical raisins is a play on words of the term "historical reasons", > [...]' and it also has an xref (hyper link) to " > http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hysterical-reasons.html"; > which adds, "[...]indicating specifically that something must be done in > some stupid way for backwards compatibility, and moreover that the feature > it must be compatible with was the result of a bad design in the first place"
The syntax for dd is *different* from most other Unix-like commands. Whether this is due to bad design or backwards combatability with various IBM things, I have no idea. ISTR that they borrowed some syntax elements from a similar command on old IBM 'frames, but ICBW. All of this was implemented years before I started working with computers, though. The thing is, there are a relatively small subset of tasks for which dd is the best tool. So its odd syntax sticks around, sort of like the "c" in "scissors" or the "k" in "knife". --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
