▲ | jadamson 6 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
What I took out of it is that we are human, and humans use abbreviations to save time and effort, not because printer ink was expensive in the '70s. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | oblio 6 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
The abbreviations I wrote are unambiguous. When I first learned about Unix, I basically guessed - I assume as most first timers do - that the folder is basically the location of miscellaneous files ("et caetera"). Oh, let alone the fact that a bunch of the abbreviations are utterly non-intuitive to first timers. /bin - binaries - nobody born after circa 1980 calls them that anymore. Executables, applications, apps, etc. /boot - from a lame Baron Munchausen joke from 1970. Should probably be /startup. /dev - dev is SUPER commonly used for "development". Easy enough to solve as /devices. /home - okish, probably one of the best named that are actually in there. I'm shocked it's not /ho or /hm. /lib - reasonable. Though these days in the US it might trigger political feelings :-p /media - new and reasonable. /mnt - the whole metaphor of "mounting" is... debatable.https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/144012-unix-sex/ /opt - what does this even do? Optional? Optional WHAT? Absolutely 0 semantic info provided by the name. Anyway, a lot of people have done this criticism better than me and it's boring at this point. | |||||||||||||||||
|