UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

[bscott at ntisys.com]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, at 4:14pm, pll at lanminds.com 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 <bscott at ntisys.com>
| 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.  |