Actually filenaming conventions
are the topic of much debate in many circles. Anyone who has worked on a project
with fellow programmers
, sysadmins, etc... knows this problem well. Anyone who has ever taken a position in a company
that's been around for any length of time is usually even more familiar with the problem. Given that Unices
today support long filenames vie with that the user slant for wanting to type as little as possible and you run into some interesting combinations. For example I work for a telecommunications
company that has been through many generations of sysadmins
, many of who know perl. These files have been called:
foo.sh (I know, I thought it was a shell script too)
One can see the confusion
that this would cause when you (for example) upgrad
/a perl module
and want to make sure nothing is going to break (although perl
is pretty good about backwards compatibility
Unices allow a lot of freedom in filenaming and for the most part this is a good thing. It is important, however, to apply a bit of common sense to your filenames The DOS legacy of many of todays administrators places that trend toward the name
format, and I think it works rather well.
perl files = name
text files = name
C shell files = name
Korn shell files = name.ksh
you get the idea.
Please never name a file "core" or "junk", or I will have no pity when you find your files deleted, restore will not be an option.