[Info-vax] "Shanghai Stock Exchange" and OpenVMS

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <d5ee8428-e6e4-4013-bad1-6846c0ca0eee at o24g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
	AEF <spamsink2001 at yahoo.com> writes:
> On Jan 28, 12:24 pm, billg... at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
>> In article <-r-dndyy7LwI6x3UnZ2dnUVZ_uedn... at giganews.com>,
>>         "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber... at comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> > AEF wrote:
>> >> On Jan 28, 1:46 am, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae... at gsi.de> wrote:
>> >>> AEF schrieb:
>>
> [...]
>> >                           There was only ONE case, uppercase!  I
>> > believe it was automagically converted to lower case and you had to
>> > "escape" anything you wanted left in uppercase.
>>
>> > There is no reason other than tradition to continue this barbarous
>> > practice but tradition is a powerful force.
>>
>> And, as I have repeatedly stated here, if you don't like it, one of
>> the strengths of Unix is you can change it.  I have used a system
>> that had an "MSDOS shell" that mimiced MSDOS pretty well.  I have
>> personally written a shell that mimiced the UCSD-Pascal menu system.
> 
> Can I change it to not be case-sensitive? If your rent check bounced
> because it was in the wrong case, would that be okay? I think not!

Sure, but it's probably more work than your likely to want to do.
You do remember that Unix started with real teletypes when there
was only one case.  I can even remember a time when if you accidently
logged on with the caps lock on it set the terminal to map everything
to single case. Of course, if you hade dual-case file names you were
screwed.....

> 
> Mimic MS-DOS? Why make things worse? MS-DOS?! Yuck.

This was around 1981.  MSDOS didn't have the bad reputation it has now.
And everyone knew it.  It was an attempt to ease MSDOS users into Unix.
Most of the users I knew who actually tried it ended out dumping it in
favor of sh or csh pretty quick.  But, as a proof of concept it worked
really well.

> 
>>
>> Adaptability is one of Unix's greatest strengths.  Which, brings up
>> the question of why no one has done it?  Guess the people who actually
>> use Unix like it the way it is.
> 
> Or it=92s not in their power to change it. Or: Those who don't use Unix
> use something else. So someone wasted time making Unix "adaptable" --
> which you claim is one of Unix's greatest strengths -- only for it to
> go unused. . . . OK.

That's ridiculous.  How many shells are there for Unix now?  How many
did it start with? Why did so many people write new shells?  Why has
no one ever written one that looked like VMS?

> 
>> >> Well, I'd think the photographic terms, as they currently exist, are
>> >> more intuitive, right?
>>
>> >> The file systems are another story. I haven't learned how you can have
>> >> different disks in the same single file system. As a user I suppose
>> >> that's fine, but in VMS the system manager can set up logical names to
>> >> reference directories so that the user (or even the programmer in many
>> >> cases) need not be concerned with what the underlying device is.
>>
>> > A unix user need not concern himself with the underlying storage media!
>> > VMS users are accustomed to seeing physical devices, each with its own
>> > filesystem.
> 
> A VMS user can be set up so that he not be concerned with device
> names. And even without that, he can use the disk logical names
> instead of physical device names.

And? 

> 
>> > In Unix, there is only ONE filesystem starting a "/" or the "root".  Th=
> e
>> > actual files may be on the one and only disk or on several different
>> > disks.  Physical disks are mounted at "mount points" which look, to VMS
>> > users, like directories.  The directories used as mount points are
>> > normally empty since mounting a device on that mount point will overlay
>> > any directory entries present.  The Unix user need not concern himself
>> > with the details of which device(s) actually contain his files.
> 
> Thanks. I thought that's what mount points were, but never bothered to
> look it up.
> 
>>
>> >> Being intuitive is not the end-all be-all. What can you do with the OS
>> >> is also important. Of course we _were_ discussing looking stuff up,
>> >> but you referred to "progress", which opens up a whole new can of
>> >> worms.
>>
>> >> Some things in Unix I find very cool, like using output of one program
>> >> as input for another.
>>
>> > VMS can do that too!  Old line VMS people tend not to use it much but
>> > it's there.  See HELP PIPE.
>>
>> A late addition, though.  Wonder where they got the idea?  (and the name!=
> )
> 
> I don't have PIPE on my VMS systems. Yes, I always found that fact
> that VMS doesn't provide and option for inputtable output (as Joe
> Meadows' FILE program does) regrettable. But I wrote my own FILTER
> command procedure to use as a PIPE-grep combination, so I at least
> have that.
> 
>> >> But VMS has some very cool things, too.
>>
>> > Indeed it does.  Starting with using English words like COPY, PRINT,
>> > DELETE, CREATE. . .  etc, as commands.
>>
>> Which is only a good thing in an Anglo-centric world.  :-)
> 
> Careful: This means that Unix commands are not good in any world.

Sure they are.  They are as English as VMS but more akin to vanity license
plates. :-)  

> 
>> >                                         It requires a little more typin=
> g
>> >   but that is not a hardship for anyone who has learned to type and is
>> > not using a Model 33 teletype.
>>
>> And there is no reason why Unix can't do the same.  Well, except maybe
>> for the fact that Unix users don't want to.  :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> > It makes the commands easy to remember.
>>
>> I have never had a problem remembering Unix commands.  And I used to go t=
> o
>> larger conferences than DECUS that were full of people who had not proble=
> m
>> remembering them.
> 
> How about a post-trimming command. All of us could use that!
> 
> I initially had trouble with "rm". I think of it as "remove" and want
> to type "rem". Yeah, that's an "I'm used to VMS"-type thing.

Sorry, I've never had that problem.  But then, I never had a problem with
remembering the "@" when I found myself on an Exec-8 system either.  I
know that there are different systems and I know the differences.  I was
actually amazed at how many people here hade "CD", "LS" and "RM" commands
(among others) on the VMS system.  I have never done that and consider
it a very bad idea.

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>