Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:9179 comp.unix.wizards:7722
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!iuvax!bsu-cs!dhesi
From: dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: command line options
Message-ID: <2603@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Date: 12 Apr 88 01:15:20 GMT
References: <2414@zyx.UUCP> <8039@elsie.UUCP> <7628@brl-smoke.ARPA> <143@gsg.UUCP> <7652@brl-smoke.ARPA> <192@sdeggo.UUCP>
Reply-To: dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi)
Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana
Lines: 17

gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ):
> > ...if you plop naive users in front of
> > a terminal running a raw Bourne shell or csh.  They were not
> > intended to serve as naive-user interfaces.

Delving into my old UNIX documentation, I find that naive users were
expected to sometimes use ed as a user interface.  That's right, raw
ed.

I think the Bourne shell *was* intended to be a naive-user interface,
though it's admittedly a terrible one.  The later C-shell and Korn
shell are better user interfaces, and they too are definitely intended
to be naive user interfaces.

Naive user does not mean stupid user.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi         UUCP:  <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!dhesi