ioctl vs. iocntl (April 3rd draft)

[std-unix at ut-sally.UUCP]

>From rbj at icst-cmr Fri May 16 12:19:42 1986
Date: Thu, 15 May 86 21:08:44 edt
From: Root Boy Jim <rbj at icst-cmr>
Message-Id: <8605160108.AA20752 at icst-cmr.ARPA>
To: std-unix%ut-sally.UUCP at SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: Re:  ioctl vs. iocntl (April 3rd draft)

		In section C.3 of the April 3rd draft, it is proposed
		that ioctl() be replaced with iocntl().  While I aggree
	with the basic arguments, I think iocntl() is a bad name for
	the new call.

Me too. The abbreviation for `control' is `ctl', not `ctrl', or `cntl'.
If you are going to abbreviate, make it worth while. In the former
case, you have used less than half the letters, in the latter case, more.
The same goes for `address', which people repeatedly abbreviate `addr'
instead of `adr', which will do just as nicely. As a side issue, note
that 99% of all companys have three letter names.

I agree with the rest of the note.

	(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell		<rbj at cmr>
	"One man gathers what another man spills"

Volume-Number: Volume 6, Number 18