Re: basic question: going back to dired

["Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 14:36, Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null> wrote:

> But don't forget its not just a comp sci term. In fact, comp sci
> borrowed it from "normal" english. In my comp sci days, also in the 80s,
> it still had the more generalised term that fits with how emacs uses
> it.

As would have lots of other terms. That's what I'm saying: "buffer"
seems like the perfect match for Emacs
data-structures-for-temporary-storage-under-whatever-name because
we've been using it that way for 25+ years, not because it is the
only, or more fitting, or more appropriate term.

This conversation (not specifically with you Tim, I'm talking about
the thread) goes nowhere. I said that I'm not proposing to change
anything, but at the same time I *don't* believe there's anything
sacred on the terms used in Emacs today. They are the best just
because of long use and long familiarity. Which does not necessarily
apply to newbies.

  Juanma