In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David O'Brien" writes:
>Mark you've given the justification and logic behind `==' much, much
>better than I did. Thanks! :-)
And yet, he says:
>> However, what Dima proposes doesn't seem to be harmful, just slightly
>> confusing, and less surprising than inventing a new delimieter such as
>> ``==''.
== is very confusing, and it's not the way anything else has ever done
delimiters. "--" already means "change the way you process words". It's
only marginally surprising to use it for another change.
>> $ env -i -- foo=bar -- 4=4 args
>> has two distinct uses of `--'' as per Dima's proposal, the first tells
>> getopt(3) to stop processing options, and the second tells the argument
>> processing code to stop looking for variable assignments (i.e. ``4=4''
>> is a command).
And this is fairly consistent. e.g., I used to have a utility which used
'--' to indicate each *set* of options, so you could have many of them, as
each set of options went to a different program.
-s
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
