On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:21:59PM +0200, Kagamin wrote: > On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 13:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer > wrote: > >No I mean, I want to pass in all the files in a directory to a > >windows command line tool. But the tool has to "opt in" to allow me > >to use wildcards. > > What if the tool handles argv[1] and exits? Or writes to argv[2] if > any. > > >No, the shell expands wildcards, not the OS. > > It was just a sarcastic comment about incredible consistency of > wildcard expansion in linux.
Exactly!! That's why I said that the chosen solution was wrong, even though the idea behind it (consistent wildcards across the board) was sound. Putting this expansion in the shell was just a poor choice. It should either be done by the program itself (via a common library routine to ensure consistency) or by the kernel (so exec*() will automatically inherit it). Putting it in the shell led to a series of consequences that eventually produced the stupid inconsistencies we have to deal with today. T -- If lightning were to ever strike an orchestra, it'd always hit the conductor first.
