[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Possible bug in name of command 'settrans'

From: A.Salatov
Subject: Re: Possible bug in name of command 'settrans'
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:59:45 +0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20071031)

Thomas Thurman wrote:
2008/6/9 A.Salatov <gamma-853-967@ufamts.ru>:

In name of command 'settrans' is too many times used 't'. Actualy it is
used in it's name, twice. But normaly name of this command must unclude 't'
only once. So in normal form, name of this command, must be such: 'setrans'.
In general it is a minor bug, but it is bug. ;-)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always understood it to mean "SET
TRANSlator", a phrase in which there are two Ts in sequence.  What would the
"se" in "setrans" mean?



No, you correct me if I'm wrong, but when I think about 'settrans' my
mind always going to compare it to 'umount' and I started to think about
a reasons why 'umount' is 'umount' and not 'unmount'. The simplest
reason for it, that I could imagine, it is so because it less typing to
do. You ever try to type 'setrans' instead 'settrans'. If it is not
enough, may be it is beter to have even shorter form, like - 'strans' :)
In this case 's' would actualy stand for "SetTRANSlator", and it OK? Ok,
all this topic is a kinda joke, but with an sense in it as I supose. If
no one would treat it in real, well then it is complitly a joke. :(

PS. Of course I remeber about aliases :) But may be I just misunderstud
some thing? :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]