... Java.^2.1

At least it was recommended by Java in about 1997. I haven't kept up-to-date with that language of weekly paradigm changes & endless remora technologies, so it might not still be the Java convention.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... namestrings.^4.1

The documentation calls them ``logical pathname namestrings'', but I think the ``pathname'' in that term is reduntant or even conflicting, so I prefer to leave it out. Hope that doesn't bother anyone.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... pathnames.^6.1

If you do your job right, a user doesn't need to know your program is written in Lisp.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... values.^6.2

``Literal component values'' might not be a very good term for that. More thought is necessary.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... them^7.1

Page 618 in [Ste90]. Section 19.2.2.1.2.1 of [X3J].

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... system^7.2

Page 617 in [Ste90].

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... cases.^9.1

Let me be clear about ``lower-case alphabetic'' words. I mean a string containing only the letters a through z. No upper-case letters, no digits, no punctuation, no spaces, & no special characters.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... systems^10.1

I think I've used just three operating systems that didn't have a concept of a current directory. They were HP 2000, HP 3000, & IBM 360. On the other hand, all three had a concept of a place where a user kept his files; maybe that place could be considred a current directory. If so, then the current directory was set when the user logged in & could not be changed.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... it.^10.2

I mention that because, if you aren't ready for it, seeing echo & a couple of escaped parents & an output redirection might be a bit of a shock.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... directory.^10.3

On some Lisps, such as clisp, you might not see the directories unless you take special steps. With the, you might see just files.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... types.^12.1

Someone from the past, using one of those systems, might wonder how anyone could use a file system that was so primitive that it did not support built-in versioning or complex record types.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... limits.^12.2

If I remember correctly, an HP/2000, an HP/3000, & a Cray something-or-other. I think the HPs ran something called MultiProgramming Environment (MPE), but I could be woefully mistaken. All of those file systems limited filenames to six characters. I think that at least one of them (can't remember which) didn't even have filename extensions (types).

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... them.^12.3

And how accurate can your predictions be?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.