In article <qvjtp-2c...@gated-at.bofh.it> David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> 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
