On 12/27/16, Evan Gates <evan.ga...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I respect your opinion and have to admit that this is not an easy >> discussion. Let's wait for some feedback and see what the others think >> about it. > > I side with Mattias on this one. Accepting -- even in utilities that > don't have flags has the benefits of 1) complying with POSIX so we can > be a drop in replacement 2) consistency with all the other tools.
Actually, POSIX talks about '--' in guideline 10 of the Utility Syntax Guidelines[0] Many tools, for example cp, say The cp utility shall conform to XBD Utility Syntax Guidelines . But this is not mentioned for printf. So, the current implementation does comply with POSIX (at least in this respect). However, I did run into an issue with musl-cross-make which was passing '--' to printf. This has been fixed[1] in the latest release though. Are there many other places where scripts use -- with printf? Can we fix those instead? [0] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap12.html#tag_12_02 [1] https://github.com/richfelker/musl-cross-make/commit/3ac08b98c1c947043df489a760135ccb7f8b783d
