On 11/3/19 11:18 PM, enh wrote: >> It's an increase (2 new lines and a macro) in code complexity rather than an >> equivalent substitution, and it's the half-dozenth return to this topic so >> far >> over an 8 month period, and I'd like to be able to enunciate what we're >> trying >> to accomplish here and put it in design.html or something. > > for me personally "existing scripts in the wild are making use of the > distinctions [as with timeout(1) or xargs(1)]" is 100% legit. and > "we've only seen this on the man page and can't imagine a use for it" > is the opposite end of the spectrum.
We're on the same page there. > this one is particularly weird because on the one hand "helps testing" > is good, but on the other hand, the fact that "the reference > implementation is ridiculous" is bad. (a) because the difference > between "minor" and "serious" seems completely arbitrary and (b) > because i'm really struggling to imagine a situation where it would > actually be useful. Yeah, I was having that problem too. > (well, i can probably guess that this was for > autotools, so they could recognize a GNU ls? but until we hit that > case in practice...) https://git.busybox.net/busybox/commit/?id=c06f568ddaaa I will go amazingly ugly to make the real world work. I'm just averse to infrastructure in search of a user and like systematic solutions where feasible... Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
