bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "PE" == Paul Eggert  writes:
PE> That argument would apply to any program, no? "cat", "diff", "sh",
PE> "node",

PE> Not sure why "ls" needs a convenience flag that would complicate the
PE> documentation and maintenance and be so rarely useful.

OK, then I'll close the bug then.

bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[Paul Eggert]

On 1/23/21 1:13 PM, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:

And any database command already has
a --limit option these days, and does not rely on a second program to
trim its output because it can't control itself. Indeed, on some remote
connections one would only want to launch one program, not two.


That argument would apply to any program, no? "cat", "diff", "sh", 
"node",


Not sure why "ls" needs a convenience flag that would complicate the 
documentation and maintenance and be so rarely useful.

bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

E.g.,
"What is API pagination? Some APIs, such as Contacts can return millions
of results. We obviously can't return all of them at once, so we need to
return a subset - or a page - at a time. This technique is called paging
and is common to most APIs. Paging can be implemented in many different
ways, some better than others."
Anyway, this ls command was built in the early years of computer science...

bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Sure, it is against the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy, but
just like SQL has LIMIT,
and
$ unicode --help
  -m MAXCOUNT, --max=MAXCOUNT
Maximal number of codepoints to display...

Just like "we want to stop pollution at the source", not always "clean up after 
it".

bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[Erik Auerswald]

Hi Dan,

On 23.01.21 22:13, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:

I hereby propose "ls --limit=..."

$ ls --limit=1 # Would only print one result item:
A

You might say:
"Jacobson, just use "ls|sed q". Closed: Worksforme."

Ah, but I am talking about items, not lines:


You can use the ls option '-1' to print one item per line:

$ touch {a..z}
$ ls -1 | head -n8
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h

You can use 'column' (from package "bsdmainutils" in Debian etc.)
to columnate the result:

$ ls -1 | head -n8 | column
a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h


Indeed, directories might be huge. And any database command already has
a --limit option these days, and does not rely on a second program to
trim its output because it can't control itself. Indeed, on some remote
connections one would only want to launch one program, not two. Thanks.


It might be nice not to have to create all the output that is to be
discarded, especially on remote and/or slow file systems.

The one program requirement could be fulfilled by a script or shell
function.

I am sorry if my email hinders possible acceptation of an implementation
of your suggestion, but I did want to show that there is a workaround
(adding non-GNU software to the mix, though).

Thanks,
Erik

bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I hereby propose "ls --limit=..."

$ ls --limit=1 # Would only print one result item:
A

You might say:
"Jacobson, just use "ls|sed q". Closed: Worksforme."

Ah, but I am talking about items, not lines:

$ ls
A  B  C  D
E  F  G  H
I  J  K  L
$ ls -C|sed 2q
A  B  C  D
E  F  G  H
$ ls -C --limit=2
AB
$ ls--limit=2
AB

Indeed, directories might be huge. And any database command already has
a --limit option these days, and does not rely on a second program to
trim its output because it can't control itself. Indeed, on some remote
connections one would only want to launch one program, not two. Thanks.