From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <588FD028-FA0F-4739-AEE9-8A4F7F2208E4@gmail.com> From: Alexander Kapshuk Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 13:44:42 +0300 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [9fans] =?utf-8?q?Why_does_Plan_9_use_=E2=80=9Csnarf=E2=80=9D_ins?= =?utf-8?b?dGVhZCBvZiDigJxjb3B54oCdPw==?= Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9dd66e0e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 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 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" 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