On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Joseph Xu <joseph...@gmail.com> wrote: > Not sure what you mean by breaking argument parsing. I think it's the > simplest way to parse a command with complex quoted arguments correctly > without having to run an extra shell process.
It breaks st argument parsing because you have to put -e at the end and the man page/usage will be cluttered with this "feature". Also, I'm not sure a command line argument is the best place to write complex code. A separate script might be a better idea. On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Moritz Wilhelmy <c...@wzff.de> wrote: > I agree with you on that. Furthermore, both urxvt and xterm do it the same > way. > ... > I think it makes sense and people are used to it that way. I've personally never had to use xterm/urxvt -e option. Oh well. If everyone wants it, might as well apply it. Anyone against it?
