Talk:Z shell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was no consensus/whatever. Duja► 09:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I think this page should be moved to "Zsh"; it seems to be universally named that way, even on the official site. Any objections? --Gwern (contribs) 20:15 24 November 2006 (GMT)
- That's the command that launches it, but is it the name? Compare C shell and "csh"; Bourne shell and "sh"; and all the other Unix shells. Ewlyahoocom 04:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Look at the link to the wiki. The front page is all 'Zsh' this and 'Zsh' that. Or heck, look at any of the external links: they all use 'zsh' or 'Zsh' (with the exception of ZSH-LOVERS(1) - which alternates between zsh and 'Z shell'. The documentation rarely uses it. Searching through man zshall, there's exactly one use of 'Z shell', and that seems to be part of the description.
- So I think it's the name. --Gwern (contribs) 04:42 21 October 2007 (GMT)
-
-
- Can you find anything more "official" than wikis and documentation? (BTW, the first line of the man page at http://www.hmug.org/man/1/zsh.php is "zsh - the Z shell".)Ewlyahoocom 05:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Yes, I mentioned the manpage. That's the only ocurrence in the man page. If you read many manpages, you know that that line takes the format 'Name - description'. In this case, it goes:
-
-
zsh - the Z shell
-
-
-
- just as in cat you see
-
-
cat - concatenate files and print on the standard output
-
-
-
- Now, cat is obviously named 'cat' and not 'concatenate files and print on the standard output', just as zsh is named 'zsh' and not 'the Z shell'. --Gwern (contribs) 00:50 23 October 2007 (GMT)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Hmmmm... so what you're saying is that the name of the thing is "zsh" but the description of the thing is "the Z shell"? I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense... however, it seems to me that they're using both "Zsh" and "Z shell" interchangeabley (e.g. here or here), therefore I now oppose the move on the grounds that the current title is less ambiguous. Ewlyahoocom 11:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Yeah. It's the description, as the man page makes clear. Consider the Zsh.h you linked to writes that the responsible persons are "Paul Falstad and the Zsh Development Group", not Paul Falstad and the Z Shell Development Group. --Gwern (contribs) 12:38 23 October 2007 (GMT)
-
-
-
-
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

