423,116 Members | 1,798 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 423,116 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

YYAT (Yet Another Acronym Thread)

P: n/a
Dear c.l.c regulars,

How about codifying a list of acceptable acronyms on c.l.c?

<g>
<g,d&r>
<VBG>
AAMOF
AFAIAA
AFAIAC
AFAIC
AFAICT
AFAIK
AFAIR
AIUI
BTW
FAQ
FUBAR
FUD
FWIW
FYI
HAND
HTH
IANAL
IINM
IIRC
IMHO
IMNSHO
IMO
IOW
ISP
ISTM
ISTR
ITYM
IIUC
IYSWIM
LART
LOL
LUSER
NNTP
OP
OTOH
PITA
PLONK
POV
RFC
ROTFL
RTFAQ
RTFM
TIA
TTFN
WTH
WYSIWYG
Y2K
YHBT
YMMV

Comments are welcome.

Tak-Shing

Source: http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/tcs/techsupp/acronyms.htm
(with some deletions)

Nov 13 '05
Share this Question
Share on Google+
89 Replies


P: n/a
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
In <Pi***********************************@unix49.andr ew.cmu.edu>
"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
> How about codifying a list of acceptable acronyms on c.l.c?

> FUBAR
Not only not needed, but there is no consensus about its meaning.


Huh? Its meaning is perfectly clear as far as I know,
modulo the R's standing for either "repair" or "recall."


A Google search for "fubar" would broaden your horizon.
Not that it's ever been used in this group AFAIK...


Which is why I said it's not needed.


groups.google.com shows 349 occurrences of "fubar" in comp.lang.c. A
number of them are within e-mail addresses; mahy of the others are in
discussions of the origin of "foo".

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
(Note new e-mail address)
Nov 14 '05 #51

P: n/a
[snips]

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 16:35:01 +0000, Dan Pop wrote:
In <pa****************************@spam.for.me.invali d> Nils Petter Vaskinn <no@spam.for.me.invalid> writes:
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:38:08 +0000, Tak-Shing Chan wrote:
Dear c.l.c regulars,

How about codifying a list of acceptable acronyms on c.l.c?

<snip>

Y2K

Is this year 2000 or year 2048 ?


Years aren't memory bits/bytes/words, so there is no place for ambiguity.


Yet hard drive capacity - measured in bytes - typically uses powers of 10,
not of 2: 1Mb is 1,000,000 bytes, not 1,048,576.

Apparently, the bits/bytes/words distinction isn't sufficient.
Nov 14 '05 #52

P: n/a
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
In <Pi***********************************@unix49.andr ew.cmu.edu>
"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

[...]
You skipped the obvious: UB.


Because it's NOT obvious: both undefined behaviour and unspecified
behaviour are equal candidates for this abbreviation, therefore neither is
the obvious meaning of the expression.


I don't think I've ever seen "UB" used in this newsgroup to refer to
"unspecified behavior". As far as I know, it has always meant
"undefined behavior" (probably because we talk about undefined
behavior a lot more often than we talk about unspecified behavior.)
Until Dan raised the point, it never occurred to me that UB might mean
"unspecified behavior". A cursory look in groups.google.com tends to
confirm this, but of course I haven't looked at all 2670 occurrences

Dan, can you provide a counterexample?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
(Note new e-mail address)
Nov 14 '05 #53

P: n/a

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:

"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
>
> FUBAR
Not only not needed, but there is no consensus about its meaning.


Huh? Its meaning is perfectly clear as far as I know,
modulo the R's standing for either "repair" or "recall."


A Google search for "fubar" would broaden your horizon.


How so? I see only the commonly accepted definition on the first
page of Google results (and in the underlined definition link).
I assume you're not referring to either the VAX instruction or the
apparel company, both of which are "joke" acronyms whose humor
derives from the fact that they're both homographs for the "FUBAR"
we all know and love. If you are, then are you being more than
usually pedantic (to the exclusion of common sense), or is this an
issue with your (or my!) English-language or pop-culture knowledge?
One might just as well claim that the word "ratchet" has no single
accepted meaning in a mechanical-engineering context, because of the
existence of the video game "Ratchet and Clank"!
And maybe even WLOG ("without loss of generality"), which might
pop up from time to time here or in related groups.


Can't remember ever seeing it. If we start throwing in everything we
think it might be useful, the list will become unmanageably large
(and, therefore, useless) instantly.


Do you *really* think that such a list of acronyms, even if it
ever gets "codified" by Paul or some other guy, is going to affect
the established Usenet subculture in any way? It's not like people
are going to stop using "ISTR" in sentences just because some guy
with a website thinks it's not self-explanatory.

And its less obvious and cutesier siblings IDB and USB.


We did very well without them until now, thank you. Especially
considering that USB already has a very well defined meaning in
computing.


One that is not applicable in c.l.c, yes. And I *have* seen
IDB used (in context, of course) in this newsgroup in the past.
It's very rare, and appropriately so.

-Arthur
Nov 14 '05 #54

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica <at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> scribbled the following:
Joona I Palaste <pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> spoke thus:
Well, there's always the ever-popular STFU ;) What the heck is STFW
anyway?
Search The Friendly Web.
Is that really what it means, or is it a skillful situational
improvisation? In either case, thanks...


Well, it's an euphemism. The real meaning has another word starting with
F.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-- http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste --------------------- rules! --------/
"Last year he disrespected me - and then he showed lack of respect."
- Anthony Mason
Nov 14 '05 #55

P: n/a
Mac
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:55:13 +0000, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
[snips]

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 19:44:51 -0800, Mac wrote:
I like LART, in particular...

I'm sure I have enountered it before in the jargon file, but not in the
wild (as far as I remember).


You can't have been around too long, then; the LART and its companion tool
the cluebat have been used fairly frequently around usenet. ;)


Maybe I've just been lucky. ;-)

Mac

Nov 14 '05 #56

P: n/a
In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
In <Pi***********************************@unix49.andr ew.cmu.edu>
"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
>> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
>> > How about codifying a list of acceptable acronyms on c.l.c?
>
>> > FUBAR
>> Not only not needed, but there is no consensus about its meaning.
>
>Huh? Its meaning is perfectly clear as far as I know,
>modulo the R's standing for either "repair" or "recall."


A Google search for "fubar" would broaden your horizon.
>Not that it's ever been used in this group AFAIK...


Which is why I said it's not needed.


groups.google.com shows 349 occurrences of "fubar" in comp.lang.c. A
number of them are within e-mail addresses; mahy of the others are in
discussions of the origin of "foo".


Which are off topic by definition ;-)

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #57

P: n/a
In <pa****************************@lightspeed.bc.ca > Kelsey Bjarnason <ke*****@lightspeed.bc.ca> writes:
[snips]

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 16:35:01 +0000, Dan Pop wrote:
In <pa****************************@spam.for.me.invali d> Nils Petter Vaskinn <no@spam.for.me.invalid> writes:
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:38:08 +0000, Tak-Shing Chan wrote:

Dear c.l.c regulars,

How about codifying a list of acceptable acronyms on c.l.c?
<snip>

Y2K

Is this year 2000 or year 2048 ?


Years aren't memory bits/bytes/words, so there is no place for ambiguity.


Yet hard drive capacity - measured in bytes - typically uses powers of 10,
not of 2: 1Mb is 1,000,000 bytes, not 1,048,576.

Apparently, the bits/bytes/words distinction isn't sufficient.


That's why I wrote "*memory* bits/bytes/words" (emphasis added). When
the same bits/bytes/words are transferred on a communication line or
stored on an external storage medium, the powers of two lose their magic
and the decimal prefixes are used: a 14.4 kbps modem is a 14400 bps modem.
Ditto for hard disk and tape capacities, although things are less
consensual here: a gigabyte may be 1e9 or 1e3 * 2**20 or 2**30 bytes and
it's not uncommon to see the size of the same disk reported in three
different ways.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #58

P: n/a
In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
In <Pi***********************************@unix49.andr ew.cmu.edu>
"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

[...]
>You skipped the obvious: UB.


Because it's NOT obvious: both undefined behaviour and unspecified
behaviour are equal candidates for this abbreviation, therefore neither is
the obvious meaning of the expression.


I don't think I've ever seen "UB" used in this newsgroup to refer to
"unspecified behavior". As far as I know, it has always meant
"undefined behavior" (probably because we talk about undefined
behavior a lot more often than we talk about unspecified behavior.)
Until Dan raised the point, it never occurred to me that UB might mean
"unspecified behavior". A cursory look in groups.google.com tends to
confirm this, but of course I haven't looked at all 2670 occurrences

Dan, can you provide a counterexample?


My point is that it's an inappropriate abbreviation because both
undefined behaviour and unspecified behaviour *could* be abbreviated like
this. These terms are already confusing to the newcomer, because they
are perfectly equivalent in plain English, there is no need to push the
confusion even further.

Of course, the regulars have little trouble identifying the intended
meaning of UB, but c.l.c should not become an exclusive club of the
regulars, hence my objections to the abbreviation.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #59

P: n/a
In <Pi**********************************@unix40.andre w.cmu.edu> "Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:

"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
>> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
>> >
>> > FUBAR
>> Not only not needed, but there is no consensus about its meaning.
>
>Huh? Its meaning is perfectly clear as far as I know,
>modulo the R's standing for either "repair" or "recall."
A Google search for "fubar" would broaden your horizon.


How so? I see only the commonly accepted definition on the first
page of Google results (and in the underlined definition link).


There are at least two meanings for the F and three for the R, not to
mention the "non-standard" meanings, which may very well be the
standard meanings for other people, depending on their backgound.
I assume you're not referring to either the VAX instruction or the
If you first encountered FUBAR in that context, you may have no idea
that it could mean something else.
>And maybe even WLOG ("without loss of generality"), which might
>pop up from time to time here or in related groups.


Can't remember ever seeing it. If we start throwing in everything we
think it might be useful, the list will become unmanageably large
(and, therefore, useless) instantly.


Do you *really* think that such a list of acronyms, even if it
ever gets "codified" by Paul or some other guy, is going to affect
the established Usenet subculture in any way?


It was not its intended purpose. Its purpose, as I see it, is to make
the c.l.c newcomer's life easier, by providing him with a translation
list. If the list is too large, its usefulness is seriously impaired
(few people will be able to remember a list containing hundreds of
abbreviations and their expansions).
It's not like people
are going to stop using "ISTR" in sentences just because some guy
with a website thinks it's not self-explanatory.
Obviously. So what? RH and Joona won't stop inventing 20 to 40 letter
ad hoc abbreviations, either.
>And its less obvious and cutesier siblings IDB and USB.


We did very well without them until now, thank you. Especially
considering that USB already has a very well defined meaning in
computing.


One that is not applicable in c.l.c, yes.


It certainly is: "USB related discussions are off topic here". People
keep asking USB related questions here, on a more or less regular basis.
And I *have* seen
IDB used (in context, of course) in this newsgroup in the past.
It's very rare, and appropriately so.


I have seen it, too, but mostly as an abbreviation proposal. In the
overwhelming majority of the cases, the term is written unabbreviated.

The idea is to codify existing practice, rather than start inventing
"useful" abbreviations.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #60

P: n/a
Joona I Palaste <pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> spoke thus:
Is that really what it means, or is it a skillful situational
improvisation? In either case, thanks...
Well, it's an euphemism. The real meaning has another word starting with
F.


I was actually referring to the fact that I had asked you, instead of
searching the fine, fabulous, fantastic web. ;) Again, thanks.

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
Nov 14 '05 #61

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica <at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> wrote in message news:<br**********@chessie.cirr.com>...
Slartibartfast <ag******@globalnet.co.uk> spoke thus:

What the heck is STFW anyway?


ITYM WTH is STFW :o)
Nov 14 '05 #62

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica <at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> scribbled the following:
Joona I Palaste <pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> spoke thus:
Is that really what it means, or is it a skillful situational
improvisation? In either case, thanks...
Well, it's an euphemism. The real meaning has another word starting with
F.
I was actually referring to the fact that I had asked you, instead of
searching the fine, fabulous, fantastic web. ;) Again, thanks.


It only just occurred to me that STFW is an answer to the question
"what does STFW mean?".

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-- http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste --------------------- rules! --------/
"Insanity is to be shared."
- Tailgunner
Nov 14 '05 #63

P: n/a

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:

Christopher Benson-Manica scribbled the following:
Joona I Palaste <pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> spoke thus:
Well, it's an euphemism. The real meaning has another word starting with
F.

I was actually referring to the fact that I had asked you, instead of
searching the fine, fabulous, fantastic web. ;) Again, thanks.


It only just occurred to me that STFW is an answer to the question
"what does STFW mean?".


And "what does WDWSF stand for?" is an answer to the question "what
does WDWSF stand for?"

-Arthur
Nov 14 '05 #64

P: n/a
Arthur J. O'Dwyer <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> scribbled the following:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
Christopher Benson-Manica scribbled the following:
> Joona I Palaste <pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> spoke thus:
>> Well, it's an euphemism. The real meaning has another word starting with
>> F.
> I was actually referring to the fact that I had asked you, instead of
> searching the fine, fabulous, fantastic web. ;) Again, thanks.


It only just occurred to me that STFW is an answer to the question
"what does STFW mean?".

And "what does WDWSF stand for?" is an answer to the question "what
does WDWSF stand for?"


Only if you take "W" as an acronym for "WDWSF". Which is more common
practive, abbreviating an acronym to its first letter, or abbreviating
it to itself? I've seen both used.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-- http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste --------------------- rules! --------/
"A bee could, in effect, gather its junk. Llamas (no poor quadripeds) tune
and vow excitedly zooming."
- JIPsoft
Nov 14 '05 #65

P: n/a

"Dave Vandervies" <dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote in message
news:br**********@rumours.uwaterloo.ca...
In article <Pi***********************************@unix49.andr ew.cmu.edu>, Arthur J. O'Dwyer <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
Missing from the list, although very frequently used: WRT.


And maybe even WLOG ("without loss of generality"), which mightpop up from time to time here or in related groups.


Don't forget WMLOG ("without much loss of generality") and

WTMLOG ("without too much loss of generality"). (While the terms are perhaps not in live use, the concepts are quite familiar, f'rexample assuming INT_MAX>CHAR_MAX. Assuming a hosted implementation probably falls into this too.)
dave

--
Dave Vandervies dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
You're implying that there's only one option. I can offer several: --Peter Seebach in

comp.lang.c

Be sure to watch out for Acronym Letter Transposition Syndrome
(SALT). This is all to common among tech types.

justin
Nov 14 '05 #66

P: n/a
Groovy hepcat Tak-Shing Chan was jivin' on Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:39:18
+0000 in comp.lang.c.
Re: [OT] Re: YYAT (Yet Another Acronym Thread)'s a cool scene! Dig it!
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Mathew Hendry wrote:
Most of those aren't acronyms though.


Depending on your definition of ``acronym''. :-)


The pocket Dictionary, Australian edition:
acronym n a word (eg radar) formed from the initial letters of other
words

The Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary:
ac-ro-nym n[C] word formed from the initial letters of a name, eg NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Do you have any other definition of "acronym"?

--

Dig the even newer still, yet more improved, sig!

http://alphalink.com.au/~phaywood/
"Ain't I'm a dog?" - Ronny Self, Ain't I'm a Dog, written by G. Sherry & W. Walker.
I know it's not "technically correct" English; but since when was rock & roll "technically correct"?
Nov 14 '05 #67

P: n/a
On 8 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312072037550.4975-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Mathew Hendry wrote:
Most of those aren't acronyms though.


Depending on your definition of ``acronym''. :-)


My definition doesn't matter. Can you find any reputable dictionary
claiming that "abbreviation" and "acronym" are synonyms? Because what
you have posted is a list of abbreviations.


``acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) formed from the
initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or
^^^^^^^^^^
major parts of a compound term.'' [http://www.m-w.com/]

According to this definition, LUSER is a valid acronym for
``Local USER''.

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #68

P: n/a
Dear c.l.c regulars,

Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:

AFAICT As Far As I Can Tell
AFAIK As Far As I Know
AFAIR As Far As I Recall
AIUI As I Understand It
ANSI American National Standards Institute
BTW By The Way
C&V (abbreviation for Chapter and Verse)
C89 (abbreviation for ANSI X3.159-1989)
C90 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC 9899:1990)
C99 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC 9899:1999)
c.l.c (abbreviation for comp.lang.c)
DR Defect Report
FAQ Frequently Asked Questions
IANAL I Am Not A Lawyer
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IIRC If I Recall Correctly
IMHO In My Humble Opinion
IMNSHO In My Not So Humble Opinion
IMO In My Opinion
IOW In Other Words
ISO (abbreviation for International Organization for
Standardization)
ISP Internet Service Provider
N869 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG14/N869
Committee Draft - January 18, 1999)
NA Normative Addendum (for ISO/IEC 9899:xxxx, e.g.
ISO 9899:1990 + TC1 + NA1 denotes a version of
Standard C that is in common use today)
OP Original Poster
OT Off Topic
OTOH On The Other Hand
PITA Pain In The A**
POV Point Of View
RFC Request For Comments
RT(F)FAQ Read The (F******) Frequently Asked Questions
RTFM Read The F****** Manual
TC Technical Corrigendum (for ISO/IEC 9899:xxxx,
e.g. ISO 9899:1990 + TC1 + NA1 denotes a version
of Standard C that is in common use today)
WRT With Respect To
WTF What The F***
WTH What The Hell
WYSIWYG What You See Is What You Get
YMMV Your Mileage May Vary

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #69

P: n/a
On 7 Dec 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
Increasing or decreasing order of relevance?


Decreasing, I think.

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #70

P: n/a
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Peter Shaggy Haywood wrote:
The pocket Dictionary, Australian edition:
acronym n a word (eg radar) formed from the initial letters of other
words

The Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary:
ac-ro-nym n[C] word formed from the initial letters of a name, eg NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Do you have any other definition of "acronym"?


Merriam-Webster: acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu)
formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the
successive parts or major parts of a compound term

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #71

P: n/a
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
[...]
According to this definition, LUSER is a valid acronym for
``Local USER''.


It would be if that were the actual derivation. The word "luser" is a
combination of "user" and "loser". The "Local USER" derivation is
somebody's failed attempt to be clever.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
(Note new e-mail address)
Nov 14 '05 #72

P: n/a
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Peter Shaggy Haywood wrote:
The pocket Dictionary, Australian edition:
acronym n a word (eg radar) formed from the initial letters of other
words

The Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary:
ac-ro-nym n[C] word formed from the initial letters of a name, eg NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Do you have any other definition of "acronym"?


Merriam-Webster: acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu)
formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the
successive parts or major parts of a compound term


That definition is essentially equivalent to the others.

The point is that some people incorrectly use the word "acronym" to
refer to abbreviations that are formed from initial letters, but are
not pronounced as words (such as AFL-CIO, NAACP, and so forth).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
(Note new e-mail address)
Nov 14 '05 #73

P: n/a
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Keith Thompson wrote:
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
[...]
According to this definition, LUSER is a valid acronym for
``Local USER''.


It would be if that were the actual derivation. The word "luser" is a
combination of "user" and "loser". The "Local USER" derivation is
somebody's failed attempt to be clever.


I believe that the validity of acronyms has nothing to do
with their original derivations. Case in point: FUBAR is a valid
acronym for at least four different derivations.

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #74

P: n/a
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Keith Thompson wrote:
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Merriam-Webster: acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu)
formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the
successive parts or major parts of a compound term


That definition is essentially equivalent to the others.

The point is that some people incorrectly use the word "acronym" to
refer to abbreviations that are formed from initial letters, but are
not pronounced as words (such as AFL-CIO, NAACP, and so forth).


None of the definitions quoted in this thread mentioned
pronunciation at all. In addition, according to Merriam-Webster
(Word for the Wise, August 28, 1997):

``It's possible to divide acronyms into initialisms, initial
letters pronounced with letter names, and word acronyms,
pronounced as words. We think the division doesn't need to be so
sharp and prefer to think of particular acronyms as falling
somewhere along a spectrum.

``At one extreme are terms that show their alphabetic
origin, like TB (for tuberculosis) and PDQ (for pretty damned
quick). Sometimes, as with TNT, folks are more familiar with the
acronym than with the source word (in that case, trinitrotoluene,
the compound in the explosive).''

Source: http://www.m-w.com/textonly/wftw/97aug/82897.htm

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #75

P: n/a
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Dear c.l.c regulars,

Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:


Bullshit. It was merely a suggestion for a list of c.l.c frequently
used abbreviations, based on your initial proposal. Nothing more and
nothing less.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #76

P: n/a
On 15 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:


Bullshit. It was merely a suggestion for a list of c.l.c frequently
used abbreviations, based on your initial proposal. Nothing more and
nothing less.


OK, I rephrase: ``here is a list of c.l.c Frequently Used
Acronyms + Abbreviations, with input from Dan Pop and others.''

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #77

P: n/a
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312131827010.1783-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Merriam-Webster: acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) ^^^^^^ formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the
successive parts or major parts of a compound term


That definition is essentially equivalent to the others.

The point is that some people incorrectly use the word "acronym" to
refer to abbreviations that are formed from initial letters, but are
not pronounced as words (such as AFL-CIO, NAACP, and so forth).


None of the definitions quoted in this thread mentioned
pronunciation at all. In addition, according to Merriam-Webster
(Word for the Wise, August 28, 1997):

``It's possible to divide acronyms into initialisms, initial
letters pronounced with letter names, and word acronyms,
pronounced as words.


This is at odds with the Merriam-Webster definition quoted above, because
it says that acronyms may or may not be words, while the definition
requires the acronym to be a word (see also the associated examples).

There is no reasonable way to claim that things like BTW and RTFM are
words of the English language, because that would effectively mean that
*any* combination of letters is an English word (once you can imagine
an expansion for it).

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #78

P: n/a
On 15 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312131827010.1783-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Merriam-Webster: acronym: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) ^^^^^^ formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the
successive parts or major parts of a compound term

That definition is essentially equivalent to the others.

The point is that some people incorrectly use the word "acronym" to
refer to abbreviations that are formed from initial letters, but are
not pronounced as words (such as AFL-CIO, NAACP, and so forth).
None of the definitions quoted in this thread mentioned
pronunciation at all. In addition, according to Merriam-Webster
(Word for the Wise, August 28, 1997):

``It's possible to divide acronyms into initialisms, initial
letters pronounced with letter names, and word acronyms,
pronounced as words.


This is at odds with the Merriam-Webster definition quoted above, because


Not true. This is at odds with your definition of ``word'',
but perfectly compatible with the quoted definition.
it says that acronyms may or may not be words, while the definition
requires the acronym to be a word (see also the associated examples).
No. It says that acronyms may or may not be *pronounced as*
words. It does not say that acronyms may or may not be words.
There is no reasonable way to claim that things like BTW and RTFM are
words of the English language, because that would effectively mean that
*any* combination of letters is an English word (once you can imagine
an expansion for it).


According to Merriam-Webster, a word is ``2 b (2) : any
segment of written or printed discourse ordinarily appearing
between spaces or between a space and a punctuation mark.''
Therefore BTW and RTFM are words.

Tak-Shing

Nov 14 '05 #79

P: n/a
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:52:11 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Tak-Shing Chan
<es***@city.ac.uk> wrote:
On 15 Dec 2003, Dan Pop wrote:
In <Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon> Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> writes:
Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:
Bullshit. It was merely a suggestion for a list of c.l.c frequently
used abbreviations, based on your initial proposal. Nothing more and
nothing less.


sheesh, lighten up will you? It was obvoiusly a tongue-in-cheek
comment, intended probably as a /compliment/ for goodness sake.
OK, I rephrase: ``here is a list of c.l.c Frequently Used
Acronyms + Abbreviations, with input from Dan Pop and others.''


Don't bother, being nice to the guy is a waste of electrons.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Nov 14 '05 #80

P: n/a
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon>...
Dear c.l.c regulars,

Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:

AFAICT As Far As I Can Tell
AFAIK As Far As I Know
AFAIR As Far As I Recall
AIUI As I Understand It
ANSI American National Standards Institute
BTW By The Way
C&V (abbreviation for Chapter and Verse)
C89 (abbreviation for ANSI X3.159-1989)
C90 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC 9899:1990)
C99 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC 9899:1999)
c.l.c (abbreviation for comp.lang.c)
DR Defect Report
FAQ Frequently Asked Questions
IANAL I Am Not A Lawyer
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IIRC If I Recall Correctly
IMHO In My Humble Opinion
IMNSHO In My Not So Humble Opinion
IMO In My Opinion
IOW In Other Words
ISO (abbreviation for International Organization for
Standardization)
ISP Internet Service Provider
N869 (abbreviation for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG14/N869
Committee Draft - January 18, 1999)
NA Normative Addendum (for ISO/IEC 9899:xxxx, e.g.
ISO 9899:1990 + TC1 + NA1 denotes a version of
Standard C that is in common use today)
OP Original Poster
OT Off Topic
OTOH On The Other Hand
PITA Pain In The A**
POV Point Of View
RFC Request For Comments
RT(F)FAQ Read The (F******) Frequently Asked Questions
RTFM Read The F****** Manual
TC Technical Corrigendum (for ISO/IEC 9899:xxxx,
e.g. ISO 9899:1990 + TC1 + NA1 denotes a version
of Standard C that is in common use today)
WRT With Respect To
WTF What The F***
WTH What The Hell
WYSIWYG What You See Is What You Get
YMMV Your Mileage May Vary

Though someone has already pointed out that the list lacks K&R and
K&R2, I still want to insist the inclusion of them if it going to be
the official reference. Also, I would like to suggest the inclusion of
DMR.

Also, the list has censored the strong words (like F***). But, if
it's really the reference, it should *not* censor the words 'coz it
__may__ again be obscure to non-native speakers.

--
"Silence is the only right answer for many wrong questions" --
G.K.Moopanar, Politician
http://guideme.itgo.com/atozofc/ - "A to Z of C" Project
Email: rrjanbiah-at-Y!com
Nov 14 '05 #81

P: n/a
R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah wrote:
Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:<Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon>...
Dear c.l.c regulars,
Though someone has already pointed out that the list lacks K&R and
K&R2, I still want to insist the inclusion of them if it going to be
the official reference.


It will never be that. It may, however, become the /unofficial/ official
reference (or, of course, it may not).

Also, I would like to suggest the inclusion of
DMR.
Traditionally spelt dmr (and it is probably worth adding bwk and kt/ken to
the list).
Also, the list has censored the strong words (like F***). But, if
it's really the reference, it should *not* censor the words 'coz it
__may__ again be obscure to non-native speakers.


I have always maintained that it is far easier, politer, and funnier to omit
the expansion of F altogether, as in: RTFM = "Read The Manual".

--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Nov 14 '05 #82

P: n/a
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:28:52 +0000, Tak-Shing Chan wrote:
Dear c.l.c regulars,

Here is a Dan Pop approved list of comp.lang.c Frequently
Used Acronyms:


Drop those common all over usenet, that way we have a list of the CLC
specific ones, instead include a reference to some general usenet acronym
list for the non-clc specific ones. That makes it easier for those already
familiar with usenet (most?) to find what's new.

Alternatively separate into CLC and others.

Like this perhaps:
Frequently used acronyms specific to comp.lang.c :

ANSI American National Standards Institute
C&V Chapter and Verse, in reference to the standard
C89 ANSI X3.159-1989 (a C standard)
C90 ISO/IEC 9899:1990 (a C standard)
C99 ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (a C standard)
c.l.c comp.lang.c
DR Defect Report
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
ISO International Organization for Standardization
K&R The C programming language by Kernighan & Ritchie
K&R2 K&R second edition
N869 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG14/N869 Committee Draft - January 18, 1999
NA Normative Addendum (to a standard)
RFC Request For Comments (standard)
TC Technical Corrigendum (to a standard)

Go to http://some.where.com/acronyms.html for explanations for other
acronyms frequently used all over usenet.
--
NPV

"the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away"
Tom Waits - Step right up

Nov 14 '05 #83

P: n/a
In <pa****************************@spam.for.me.invali d> Nils Petter Vaskinn <no@spam.for.me.invalid> writes:
Drop those common all over usenet, that way we have a list of the CLC
specific ones, instead include a reference to some general usenet acronym
list for the non-clc specific ones. That makes it easier for those already
familiar with usenet (most?) to find what's new.

Alternatively separate into CLC and others.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is the right approach. You still want to keep both categories inside
the same document, for the sake of c.l.c newbies that are also Usenet
newbies. Most general Usenet abbreviations lists are too large to be of
much use to the newbie.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #84

P: n/a
In <ab**************************@posting.google.com > ng**********@rediffmail.com (R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah) writes:
Though someone has already pointed out that the list lacks K&R and
K&R2, I still want to insist the inclusion of them if it going to be
the official reference.
No point in duplicating the FAQ, which explains these abbreviations.
Also, I would like to suggest the inclusion of DMR.
I would like to suggest that writing the person's name is the right
thing and that the usage of user ids instead is inappropriate. I have a
feeling you wouldn't be particularly pleased if people referred to you as
ng4rrjanbiah.
Also, the list has censored the strong words (like F***). But, if
it's really the reference, it should *not* censor the words 'coz it
__may__ again be obscure to non-native speakers.


If the non-native speaker has a functioning brain, he can easily figure
out the meaning. Explicit obscenity is going to offend some other people,
so the F*** is probably the best compromise.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #85

P: n/a
>Tak-Shing Chan <es***@city.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.4.33.0312122121030.19984-100000@swindon>...
ISO (abbreviation for International Organization for
Standardization)


It's open to debate whether this is an abbreviation at all:

What ISO's name means

Because "International Organization for Standardization" would have
different abbreviations in different languages ("IOS" in English,
"OIN" in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation),
it was decided at the outset to use a word derived from the Greek
isos, meaning "equal". Therefore, whatever the country, whatever the
language, the short form of the organization's name is always ISO.

That's not uncommon where international organisations are concerned.
There is no connection between CERN and the organisation's long name
and there hasn't been one for quite a while. At the origin, it was the
acronym of the European scientific body that decided the laboratory's
creation (Conseil Europeen pour la Recherche Nucleaire). The current
name is "European Organisation for Nuclear Research" and the previous
name was "European Laboratory for Particle Physics". The only thing
they have in common with CERN is the length of a proper abbreviation:
EONR and, respectively, ELPP ;-)

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de
Nov 14 '05 #86

P: n/a
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
In <ab**************************@posting.google.com >
ng**********@rediffmail.com (R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah) writes:
Though someone has already pointed out that the list lacks K&R and
K&R2, I still want to insist the inclusion of them if it going to be
the official reference.


No point in duplicating the FAQ, which explains these abbreviations.


No point in leaving out common abbreviations that are also in the FAQ.
(BTW, make sure the title uses the word "abbreviations", not
"acronyms".)
Also, I would like to suggest the inclusion of DMR.


I would like to suggest that writing the person's name is the right
thing and that the usage of user ids instead is inappropriate. I have a
feeling you wouldn't be particularly pleased if people referred to you as
ng4rrjanbiah.


I see your point, but It depends on the person. Some people actually
prefer to be referred to by their user ids or initials (RMS, for
example, I think), and I have no problem being referred to as "kst".
(You probably use "Dan.Pop" just to confuse the issue. 8-)})

I don't know how Dennis Ritchie feels about it; if he prefers his full
name, then of course we should respect that.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
(Note new e-mail address)
Nov 14 '05 #87

P: n/a
Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote in message news:<br***********@sunnews.cern.ch>...
In <ab**************************@posting.google.com > ng**********@rediffmail.com (R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah) writes:
Though someone has already pointed out that the list lacks K&R and
K&R2, I still want to insist the inclusion of them if it going to be
the official reference.


No point in duplicating the FAQ, which explains these abbreviations.


You already made that point somewhere in the thread. My point was:
What if the FAQ says about K&R but the "abbreviations/acronym list"
doesn't have any note of it... I'd thought it would be so weird.

Just quickly searched the FAQ and found that FAQ uses K&R, but it
doesn't explain what is K&R (may be I'm blind to find that). But,
fortunately other online dictionaries like Jargon file and Wiki
explain about K&R and "White book"

Also, I would like to suggest the inclusion of DMR.


I would like to suggest that writing the person's name is the right
thing and that the usage of user ids instead is inappropriate. I have a
feeling you wouldn't be particularly pleased if people referred to you as
ng4rrjanbiah.


I think, you misunderstood me here. In comp.lang.c, I've seen DMR
and dmr to refer Dennis M. Ritchie, and also seen RJH and RH to refer
Richard Heathfield...and DP to refer Dan Pop. That's why I mentioned.
I didn't aware that they're their user ids or offending/inappropriate
form to represent those people.
Also, the list has censored the strong words (like F***). But, if
it's really the reference, it should *not* censor the words 'coz it
__may__ again be obscure to non-native speakers.


If the non-native speaker has a functioning brain, he can easily figure
out the meaning. Explicit obscenity is going to offend some other people,
so the F*** is probably the best compromise.


If the non-native speaker has a "functioning brain", he won't even
look at the abbreviations list. X comes to refer what is RTFM; but the
abbreviations reference reads "Read The F****** Manual". I don't
think, he can find any other reference that says F****** is
f-u-c-k-i-n-g. Also, I don't find any reason to hide the "truth" in
"books" or online reference. (Just my thoughts, obviously your mileage
may vary)

--
http://www.fas.org/news/india/1998/05/0829059802.htm - P.A.Sangma's
great speach against nuke
http://guideme.itgo.com/atozofc/ - "A to Z of C" Project
Email: rrjanbiah-at-Y!com
Nov 14 '05 #88

P: n/a
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In comp.lang.c, R. (ng**********@rediffmail.com) wrote:
If the non-native speaker has a "functioning brain", he won't even
look at the abbreviations list. X comes to refer what is RTFM; but the
abbreviations reference reads "Read The F****** Manual". I don't
think, he can find any other reference that says F****** is
f-u-c-k-i-n-g. Also, I don't find any reason to hide the "truth" in
"books" or online reference. (Just my thoughts, obviously your mileage
may vary)


Just add:

F***: Fuck
F******: Fucking

To the acronyn list, and that's solved.

I don't see the reason to censor anyword, though.

- --
My real e-mail address: chema (AT) chema.homelinux.org
http://EuropeSwPatentFree.hispalinux.es - EuropeSwPatentFree
I don't read HTML posts / No leo mensajes en HTML
Blog Overflow: http://chema.homelinux.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/4EXg9P6GbSlI+hkRAnQTAKCROzYyAw3AkN4xJy205YzSNa03OQ Cg1RDb
DS39uvr2eSYFEwTKE4vALl4=
=UDuY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Nov 14 '05 #89

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield wrote:
I have always maintained that it is far easier, politer, and
funnier to omit the expansion of F altogether, as in: RTFM =
"Read The Manual".


I always got a kick out of the Military version:

Read the Manual, Sir!

--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch***@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|_____________________________________________|___ ____________________|
Nov 14 '05 #90

89 Replies

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.