2013/10/4 Raphaël Proust <raphla...@gmail.com>: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Alexander S. <alex0pla...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Uh, cannot this be achieved by piping output to tac? > > At which points someone asks why is there a sorted order at all in ls > output… cannot this be achieved by piping output to sort? sort(1) can only sort by name, which is clearly less powerful than we want. So no, we cannot. If we want to retain this patch, I'd suggest reversing array after sorting, not multiplying by `sortorder' in comparison functions. This avoids code duplication.
- [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls: add option to revers... Markus Teich
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls: add option ... sin
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls: add opt... Alexander S.
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls: add... Roberto E. Vargas Caballero
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls:... Markus Teich
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls: add... Raphaël Proust
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls:... Alexander S.
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH... Markus Teich
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH... Rob
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [P... Markus Teich
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [P... Alexander S.
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls:... Nick
- Re: [dev] [sbase] [PATCH] ls:... Thorsten Glaser