English Idiom in Unix: Directory Recursively

[Thorsten Kampe]

* Steven D'Aprano (26 May 2011 10:06:44 GMT)
> 
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 10:48:07 +0200, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> 
> > But not to digress, the /real/ problem with commands or idioms like "rm
> > -r" is /not/ their choice of option names but that they explain these
> > options in the exact same terms. No one would have a problem with "-r,
> > --recursive -- remove directories including all sub-directories" instead
> > of "-r, --recursive -- remove directories and their contents
> > recursively".
> 
> I think you are understanding the description "remove directories and 
> their contents recursively" as a description of the *mechanism* by which 
> rm removes the directory, i.e. some recursive tree-walking function that 
> visits each node and deletes it.
> 
> I don't believe that's how the description is meant to be understood. I 
> understand it as describing the effect, not the implementation.

It doesn't matter how I interprete the explanation "-r = recursively 
delete". What matters is that I have to explain (interpret, translate 
the explanation.

> You're interpreting the reference to "recursive" as a nod to the
> implementation. I'm not, and therefore your arguments don't convince
> me.

No one understands what "recursively delete" means until someone 
explains ("translates") it to him. This is not an argument but a simple 
fact. I experienced it many times, others here in the thread did and 
probably you, too.

"recursively delete" is completely unneccessary because there is already 
a simple explanation that everyone understands without translation 
("delete including subdirectories").

It's unnecessary bullshit buzzword bingo from nerds which adds or helps 
or explains nothing. It's just that simple.

Thorsten