Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Tony Kelman
Julia supports Windows, which is not a posix platform. So while Julia uses posix-inspired names in some places, that's not universally the case, and they're often jargony and confusing if you're not a Unix user. On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 1:30:25 PM UTC-7, Evan Fields wrote: > > Which

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Evan Fields
Which can get gnarly on Windows, depending how you launched Julia. E.g. just launching from the Julia executable: shell> ls ERROR: could not spawn `ls`: no such file or directory (ENOENT) in _jl_spawn(::String, ::Array{String,1}, ::Ptr{Void}, ::Base.Process, ::RawFD, ::RawFD, ::RawFD) at

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Stefan Karpinski
There's already shell mode: ;cd projects ;ls in the REPL. On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:56 PM, wrote: > > There are POSIX standards for new programming language function names? > > No, but you've implemented functions with POSIX names > > > yes, ls() could be a better

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread adrian_lewis
> There are POSIX standards for new programming language function names? No, but you've implemented functions with POSIX names > yes, ls() could be a better name In the REPL, I might julia> cd("projects") And want to julia> ls() to see what's there But, I probably wouldn't want to do that

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Keno Fischer
readdir is POSIX: http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/readdir.3.html On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Chris Rackauckas wrote: > Here it is: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/3376. Would > changing to ls be back on the table? > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Chris Rackauckas
Here it is: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/3376. Would changing to ls be back on the table? On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 9:41:55 AM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > There are POSIX standards for new programming language function names? But > yes, ls() could be a better

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Stefan Karpinski
There are POSIX standards for new programming language function names? But yes, ls() could be a better name. On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Adrian Lewis wrote: > > You can find a thread/issue where this is discussed. Some group decided > to call it readdir() and

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Adrian Lewis
> You can find a thread/issue where this is discussed. Some group decided to call it readdir() and like it more. I just got used to it. I think it's silly, but it's just syntax. I thought it might be an idea to stick with POSIX standards. On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 4:40:03 PM UTC+1,

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Chris Rackauckas
You can find a thread/issue where this is discussed. Some group decided to call it readdir() and like it more. I just got used to it. I think it's silly, but it's just syntax. On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 7:36:18 AM UTC-7, Jacob Quinn wrote: > > readdir() > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:34

Re: [julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Jacob Quinn
readdir() On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Adrian Lewis wrote: > In the filesystem package, if we have pwd() and cd(), why do we not have > ls()? > > Aidy >

[julia-users] ls()?

2016-09-14 Thread Adrian Lewis
In the filesystem package, if we have pwd() and cd(), why do we not have ls()? Aidy