3 ms·
>is "rm" (pronounced "remove") really synonymous with "delete". Do I call the deleters when I want to move house. How would my first cousins once-deleted feel?
by jovial_cavalier 6y ago
>is "rm" (pronounced "remove") really synonymous with "delete". Do I call the deleters when I want to move house. How would my first cousins once-deleted feel?
I don't think it's good to make the command name an English word. Perhaps it would make the command easier to discover, but it would also introduce certain unpredictable connotations.
For instance, if the command was called 'remove', then someone might presume that it was being 'removed,' and 'replaced,' somewhere else. 'Remove' has the connotation that you are taking something and necessarily putting it somewhere else, which is not what 'rm' does.
'delete' has less ambiguity, but I'm not confident that similar mixups wouldn't happen. It's better for the command to be something ideosyncratic so that the user goes in with no assumptions about its function.
To paraphrase Rob Pike, the command is not remove, but 'rm'. It's called 'rm' because rm is what it does.
http://mail.9fans.net/pipermail/9fans/2016-September/035429.html http://mail.9fans.net/pipermail/9fans/2016-September/035429....
- santoshalper 6y agoBut that's really nonsense, right? It's clearly intended to be a shorthand for "remove" that saves a few keystrokes, just as "cp" is a shorthand for copy. And remove is ambiguous compared to delete. These are petty complaints, but Rob Pike's attempt to dodge them seems a big disingenuous.