Re: About more loose parameter sequence requirement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 2018年06月19日 22:47, David Sterba wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:05:59PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> New code needs to be tested, documented and maintained, that's the cost
>>> I find too high for something that's convenience for people who are used
>>> to some shell builtins.
>>
>> The biggest problem is, the behavior isn't even consistent across
>> btrfs-progs.
>> mkfs.btrfs accept such out-of-order parameters while btrfs not.
>>
>> And most common tools, like commands provided by coretutil, they don't
>> care about the order.
>> The only daily exception is 'scp', which I found it pretty unhandy.
>>
>> And just as Paul and Hugo, I think there are quite some users preferring
>> out-of-order parameter/options.
> 
> Because of the feedback and interest of the relaxed mixed
> option/argument syntax, I don't object anymore.

And in fact, the behavior of btrfs is caused by @optind wrongly initialized.
The fix is just one line (along some comments).

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10473173/

So no or little pressure on maintenance.

Thanks,
Qu

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux