From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from relay2.UU.NET ([137.39.1.7]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2718>; Wed, 24 Jun 1992 18:45:23 -0400
Received: from uunet.uu.net (via localhost.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP 
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA11037; Wed, 24 Jun 92 17:41:43 -0400
Received: from srg.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL
	(queueing-rmail) id 174034.2539; Wed, 24 Jun 1992 17:40:34 EDT
Received: from ceres.srg.af.mil by srg.srg.af.mil
	id aa07804; Wed, 24 Jun 92 17:19:31 EDT
From:	culliton@srg.af.mil (Tom Culliton x2278)
X-Mailer: SCO System V Mail (version 3.2)
To:	cks@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu, rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
Subject: Re: Command execution
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 1992 17:19:34 -0400
Message-Id: <9206241719.aa07461@ceres.srg.af.mil>

>>  Duff's rc lets you define a function that looks like a full path, and
>> running the full path will run the function (ie, fn /bin/csh ...). I
>> don't think this is a good idea myself; the uses seem limited to trapping
>> standard programs when invoked by explicit paths, and I see more problems
>> as a result than solutions.

This was exactly what I wanted to do.  One of my friends likes to run a
couple of obnoxious programs on my workstation when he drops by to
visit and I'm not in the office.  Since they're coming from the file
server's shared bin directory a function seemed like a good way to
interdict them.  I can also see other uses to transparently stick a
front end on something, say to translate command line options from one
form to another.  In any case, it was a fairly minor quibble.

>>				Contrary to the documentation, Duff's rc
>> and Byron's behave the *same* for 'foo/bar', and at least Rob Pike a)
>> thinks this is a good thing and b) uses this feature.

This iregularity troubles me more, but thats just because odd little
gotchas set my teeth on edge, and in almost any other unix context
"x/y" is identical to "./x/y".  Could you say more about why Pike
thinks this is good and what you would use it for?

Tom