From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mateusz Piotrowski Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <588FD028-FA0F-4739-AEE9-8A4F7F2208E4@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:19:14 +0200 To: 9fans@9fans.net Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: [9fans] =?utf-8?q?Why_does_Plan_9_use_=E2=80=9Csnarf=E2=80=9D_ins?= =?utf-8?b?dGVhZCBvZiDigJxjb3B54oCdPw==?= Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9d413780-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Hello, I've discovered Plan 9 recently and became curious about some=20 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.=20 "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=20 it is explained? Cheers! Mateusz Piotrowski [1]: = http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/308943/why-does-plan-9-use-snarf-i= nstead-of-copy= 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: Robert Raschke Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:38:53 +0200 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113b02824bee62053c4d1a28 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: 9d526e56-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001a113b02824bee62053c4d1a28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 --001a113b02824bee62053c4d1a28 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Mateusz,

as far as I remember, it was originally called "xerox&q= uot;. But that is trademarked. No idea where the word "snarf" com= es from.

Cheers,
Robby

On 12 Sep 2016 12:19, "Mateusz Piotrowski&q= uot; <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
--001a113b02824bee62053c4d1a28-- 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 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: Rob Pike Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 22:27:31 +1000 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: 9ddaa208-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 The operation is not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because snarf is what it does. There is no design document. -rob On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: > 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 > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Mateusz Piotrowski In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:37:13 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <0C660D3C-2E3C-435B-BA8B-0F98001FDDD8@gmail.com> References: <588FD028-FA0F-4739-AEE9-8A4F7F2208E4@gmail.com> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> 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: 9ddef5ba-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 12 Sep 2016, at 14:27, Rob Pike wrote: > The operation is not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because > snarf is what it does. There is no design document. Thank you, Rob! Mateusz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <588FD028-FA0F-4739-AEE9-8A4F7F2208E4@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Skip Tavakkolian Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 17:20:18 +0000 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cf08c69bf0b053c52b6e3 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: 9de332f6-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001a113cf08c69bf0b053c52b6e3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Zerox is very different. Try this: Zerox a pane, put the cursors of both panes at the same spot and edit one. On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:39 AM 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 > > --001a113cf08c69bf0b053c52b6e3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Zerox is very different. Try this: Zerox a pane, put the c= ursors of both panes at the same spot and edit one.

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:39 AM Robert Raschke = <rtrlists@googlemail.com&= gt; wrote:

Hi Mateus= z,

as far as I remember, it was originally called "xerox&q= uot;. But that is trademarked. No idea where the word "snarf" com= es from.

Cheers,
Robby

On 12 Sep 2016 12:19, "Mateusz Piotrowski&q= uot; <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-o= f-copy
--001a113cf08c69bf0b053c52b6e3-- 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: Winston Kodogo Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:57:51 +1200 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1148733a51d395053c5ac7a5 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: 9de8257c-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001a1148733a51d395053c5ac7a5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Channeling my inner Quine here. Did you mean: The operation is not "copy" but "snarf". It's called "snarf" because snarf is what it does. Of course the White Knight would also have asked what the name of the operation was called. But be that as it may, a simple explanation of the difference between "snarf" and "copy" would be welcome, especially since under Windows I can snarf in Sam and paste into TextPad. Whereas I have to copy in Notepad and paste into TextPad. On 13 September 2016 at 00:27, Rob Pike wrote: > The operation is not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because > snarf is what it does. There is no design document. > > -rob > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Kapshuk > wrote: > > 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 > > > > --001a1148733a51d395053c5ac7a5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Channeling my inner Quine here. Did you mean:
The operation is not "copy" but "snarf". It's = called "snarf" because
snarf is what it does.

Of course the White Knight would also = have asked what the name of the operation was called.

But be t= hat as it may, a simple explanation of the difference between "snarf&q= uot; and "copy" would be welcome, especially since under Windows = I can snarf in Sam and paste into TextPad. Whereas I have to copy in Notepa= d and paste into TextPad.

On 13 September 2016 at 00:27, Rob Pike <robpike@gmail.= com> wrote:
The operation i= s not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because
snarf is what it does. There is no design document.

-rob

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Kapshuk
<alexander.kapshuk@gmail.= com> wrote:
> 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.<= br> >>
>> 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<= br> >> 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 StackExchan= ge
>> 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]:
>> htt= p://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/308943/why-does-plan-9-use-s= narf-instead-of-copy
>


--001a1148733a51d395053c5ac7a5-- 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: Jules Merit Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:25:58 -0700 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134f3fe75d7fd053c5c0240 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: 9dece152-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001a1134f3fe75d7fd053c5c0240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 The EUROcorp fork of plan9 has no snafu. Haven't figured out how to name things for brown nosers to climb the SocLadder of troglodytes. I tried inventing spork(), but who would want to read your e-mails. On Sep 12, 2016 8:00 PM, "Winston Kodogo" wrote: > Channeling my inner Quine here. Did you mean: > > The operation is not "copy" but "snarf". It's called "snarf" because > snarf is what it does. > > Of course the White Knight would also have asked what the name of the > operation was called. > > But be that as it may, a simple explanation of the difference between > "snarf" and "copy" would be welcome, especially since under Windows I can > snarf in Sam and paste into TextPad. Whereas I have to copy in Notepad and > paste into TextPad. > > On 13 September 2016 at 00:27, Rob Pike wrote: > >> The operation is not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because >> snarf is what it does. There is no design document. >> >> -rob >> >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Kapshuk >> wrote: >> > 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" 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 >> > >> >> > --001a1134f3fe75d7fd053c5c0240 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The EUROcorp fork of plan9 has no snafu. Haven't figured= out how to name things for brown nosers to climb the SocLadder of troglody= tes. I tried inventing spork(), but who would want to read your e-mails.


On Sep 12, 2016 8= :00 PM, "Winston Kodogo" <= kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
Channeling my inner Quine here. Di= d you mean:

The operation is not "copy" but "snarf&qu= ot;. It's called "snarf" because
snarf is what it does.

Of course the White Knight would also = have asked what the name of the operation was called.

But be t= hat as it may, a simple explanation of the difference between "snarf&q= uot; and "copy" would be welcome, especially since under Windows = I can snarf in Sam and paste into TextPad. Whereas I have to copy in Notepa= d and paste into TextPad.

On 13 September 2016 at 00:27, Rob Pike <robpike@gmail.= com> wrote:
The operation i= s not to copy but to snarf. It's called snarf because
snarf is what it does. There is no design document.

-rob

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Kapshuk
<alexan= der.kapshuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.<= br> >>
>> Cheers,
>> Robby
>>
>> On 12 Sep 2016 12:19, "Mateusz Piotrowski" <mpp302@gmail.com> wro= te:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've discovered Plan 9 recently and became curious about some<= br> >> 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 StackExchan= ge
>> 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]:
>> htt= p://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/308943/why-does-plan-9-use-s= narf-instead-of-copy
>


--001a1134f3fe75d7fd053c5c0240--