Re: [9fans] Why does Plan 9 use “snarf” instead of “copy”?

[Alexander Kapshuk <alexander.kapshuk@gmail.com>]

Both 'Zerox' and 'Snarf' are there:

/sys/src/cmd/acme/cols.c:34
textinsert(t, 0, L"New Cut Paste Snarf Sort Zerox Delcol ", 38, TRUE);

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Robert Raschke <rtrlists@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mateusz,
>
> as far as I remember, it was originally called "xerox". But that is
> trademarked. No idea where the word "snarf" comes from.
>
> Cheers,
> Robby
>
> On 12 Sep 2016 12:19, "Mateusz Piotrowski" <mpp302@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've discovered Plan 9 recently and became curious about some
> design decisions.
>
> Why there is a snarf buffer and not a copy buffer?
>
> As it might seem to be a dull question, it is not. I am very
> interested in the reason behind this decision. I've browsed
> numerous websites (including cat-v.org and the 9fans archives)
> but I wasn't able to find anything about it.
>
> I decided to ask this question [1] on Unix & Linux StackExchange
> but its community doesn't seem to know the answer.
>
> My guess is that "copying" is not as an atomic action.
> "Copying" is in fact:
>
> - obtaining the content you want to copy (_snarfing_)
> - inserting the content where you want it to be (_pasting_)
>
> Hence the use of snarf instead of copy.
>
> Am I right? Is there a document / book / article where
> it is explained?
>
> Cheers!
>
> Mateusz Piotrowski
>
> [1]:
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/308943/why-does-plan-9-use-snarf-instead-of-copy