In article <[email protected]> David Wright 
<[email protected]> wrote:
> As for script-file extensions in DOS, there was really only .BAT
> wasn't there?, so the idea of distinguishing .bash, .csh, .py, .pl,
> .sh, .zsh etc as being inherited from DOS is difficult for me to
> understand.

Perhaps it's because (MS)DOS begat WINDOWS that only knew how to run
something based on the extension?

And that is why we shudder on the sight of a (unnecessary?) extension?


-- 
MartinS

Reply via email to