Re: $foo $bar is BAD

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: $foo $bar is BAD
Date: 2016-04-15 23:51:04
Message-ID: 4038.1460764264@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> writes:
> On 4/15/2016 4:35 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote:
>> *Anyone that has done time in the military, and other goverment
>> agencies, has been introduced to the term fubar, which stands for
>> "fouled up beyond all repair". Although fouled was replaced by another
>> similar word where the 2nd, 3rd and 4th letters were substituted with
>> other letters that gave more significance to it. Over time, fu was
>> somehow misheard as foo, and coders commonly started using it in
>> examples. Not Cool!*

> omg, grow up.

FWIW, the Jargon File (a/k/a Hackers Dictionary) says that "foo" can be
traced back further than "fubar", making the OP's claim rather backwards.
In any case, it's an old enough term that nobody is going to give it up
on such grounds.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/F/foo.html

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John McKown 2016-04-16 00:05:53 Re: $foo $bar is BAD
Previous Message John R Pierce 2016-04-15 23:39:31 Re: $foo $bar is BAD