Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 03 Jun 2001 17:39:53 -0500
From:      seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
To:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Fixing documented bug in env(1) 
Message-ID:  <200106032239.f53Mdr521522@guild.plethora.net>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 03 Jun 2001 15:19:39 PDT." <20010603151939.B30607@dragon.nuxi.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20010603151939.B30607@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" writes:
>Mark you've given the justification and logic behind `==' much, much
>better than I did.  Thanks! :-)

And yet, he says:

>> However, what Dima proposes doesn't seem to be harmful, just slightly
>> confusing, and less surprising than inventing a new delimieter such as
>> ``==''.

== is very confusing, and it's not the way anything else has ever done
delimiters.  "--" already means "change the way you process words".  It's
only marginally surprising to use it for another change.

>>     $ env -i -- foo=bar -- 4=4 args

>> has two distinct uses of `--'' as per Dima's proposal, the first tells
>> getopt(3) to stop processing options, and the second tells the argument
>> processing code to stop looking for variable assignments (i.e. ``4=4''
>> is a command).

And this is fairly consistent.  e.g., I used to have a utility which used
'--' to indicate each *set* of options, so you could have many of them, as
each set of options went to a different program.

-s

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200106032239.f53Mdr521522>