Re: [TUHS] Unix stories, Stephen Bourne and IF-FI in C code

I wasn't directly involved in this, but I do remember Dennis telling me essentially the same story.  I don't recall him mentioning Ken's name, just that "we couldn't use _od_ because that was already taken". Steve B and I had adjacent offices, so I overheard a lot of the discussions about the Bourne shell.  The quoting mechanisms, in particular, got a lot of attention, I think to good end.  There was a lot more thought there than is evident from the surface... Steve (not Bourne) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Norman Wilson" &lt;norman(a)oclsc.org&gt; To:<tuhs@tuhs.org> Cc: Sent:Sun, 08 Jan 2017 21:30:03 -0500 Subject:Re: [TUHS] Unix stories, Stephen Bourne and IF-FI in C code Doug McIlroy: There was some pushback which resulted in the strange compromise of if-fi, case-esac, do-done. Alas, the details have slipped from memory. Help, scj? ==== do-od would have required renaming the long-tenured od(1). I remember a tale--possibly chat in the UNIX Room at one point in the latter 1980s--that Steve tried and tried and tried to convince Ken to rename od, in the name of symmetry and elegance. Ken simply said no, as many times as it took. I don't remember who I heard this from; anyone still in touch with Ken who can ask him? Norman Wilson Toronto ON