Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:43:53 +1000 From: Greg Black <gjb@gbch.net> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Subject: Re: Fixing documented bug in env(1) Message-ID: <nospam-991611833.36351@maxim.gbch.net> In-Reply-To: <20010603151741.A30607@dragon.nuxi.com> of Sun, 03 Jun 2001 15:17:41 MST References: <20010602041242.849893E33@bazooka.unixfreak.org> <p05100e09b73e2fbdba9e@[128.113.24.47]> <nospam-991579783.24682@maxim.gbch.net> <20010603151741.A30607@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien wrote: | On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 12:49:43AM +1000, Greg Black wrote: | > | For whatever it's worth, it seems more reasonable to me | > | to use '--' instead of '=='. Since '--' has NO equals | > | sign in it, it clearly can't be the setting of an | > | environment variable. | > | > If we're voting on this, I'm very strongly in favour of `--'. | | Why? The reasons have already been articulated. In brief, there is prior experience with using `--' as an indicator that argument processing is to change at this point; using it twice for the same purpose conflicts less with POLA than inventing the `==' thing, which has never been used for anything. The real reason for my post was that there was an indication that responses in favour of one or the other of the proposed mechanisms would be taken into account in the decision. I don't want to see this `==' idea get up. 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?nospam-991611833.36351>