"Chris Rebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am somewhat in favor of short options, if only because they allow > for less typing. > May I suggest that they be: > > * -h (help) > * -s (is-command-substitution) > * -b (is-block) > * -i (is-interactive) > * -l (is-login) > * -f (current-filename) > * -n (current-line-number) > * -j (job-control) > * -t (print-stack-trace) > > Opinions?
Plus -L for --last-job if that gets added. But... >> The main question, then, for me is do we want single letter switches >> for status? They're handy, but since one uses status only in scripts short options are not really needed. But opinions may vary... Bye, Tassilo -- The desire to be rewarded for one's creativity does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that creativity. (Richard M. Stallman) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
