On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 12:38:20PM -0500, Aaron wrote: Having written the first versions of getopt(3), getopt(1), and associated man pages around 1979, I do not recall any real orthodoxy in the use of ???options??? vs ???flags.??? In general, ???flags??? seemed to be reserved for single arguments in the form of ???-x??? I wrote getopt, and rewrote many commands to use it because I got annoyed at trying to remember which commands required ???-x -y -z??? vs ???-xyz???, and which flags required or allowed optional arguments. Aaron >> On Mar 2, 2024, at 5:22???PM, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote: > > ??? >> >> From: Bakul Shah > >> Use of "flag" for this purpose seems strange. "option" makes more sense. > > People on this list seem to forget that there were computers before UNIX. > > The _syntax_ of "-f" probably predates any UNIX; Multics used it extensively. > See the "Introduction to Multics", MAC-TR-123, January 1974 (a little after > UNIX V1, but I expect I could probably track it back further in time, if I > cared to put in the effort); pg. 3-24. > > Interestingly, I looked though the CTSS manual, and CTSS did not seem to use > this syntax for flag arguments: see, e.g., the SAVE command (section AH.3.03). > > > The _name_ "flag" came in early on UNIX. (Multics called them "arguments"; > see above, pg. 3-27, top line.) We can see this happen - see: > > http://squoze.net/UNIX/v1man/man1/du > > which calls the "-a" and "-s" "arguments"; but in: > > http://squoze.net/UNIX/v1man/man1/ld > > "-s", "-u", etc are called "flag arguments". > > Long enough ago that certainty about the etymology/rationale is probably now > lost. > > Noel