Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 13:41:52 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.ORG>, "J. Mallett" <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>, "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/sed main.c sed.1 Message-ID: <XFMail.20020508134152.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <xzplmauprle.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08-May-2002 Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes: >> I think green was implying that sed would have its own getopt instead >> of changing the system getopt. > > Ugh. Nasty. Especially if the modified getopt() could be useful to > other programs as well (do we have any programs with options that take > optional arguments?) Most people consider optional arguments a bad thing, and apparently they are forbidden by some standards. I think the intent was to discourage other programs from using this "bad" practice by not changing the getopt in libc. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20020508134152.jhb>