On 6/6/09, Chris Rees <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/6/6 Wojciech Puchar <[email protected]>: >>>> what some single-letter option meant. I pretty much never use them on >>>> the command line, though. >>> >>> Agreed, the long options *as an alternative* can be descriptive in >>> scripts, >>> tutorials, howto's etc. >>> The other reason often mentioned, there being not enough letters in the >>> alphabet to cover all possible options, in my opinion advocates bloated >>> software (one program can do it all), which goes against the Unix >>> paradigm >>> of making small programs that do one task exceptionally well and just >>> chaining these together. >> >> you exaggerate a bit. >> >> for example rsync does have >26 options but most make sense for program >> that >> is dedicated to one task, and it isn't against Unix paradigm. >> >> But it have one letter shortcuts for mostly used parameters >> > > Can I be picky and point out it's actually 52 short options? > > [ch...@amnesiac]~% ls -f > quantumdot mail cromwell_1024.bin.gz > public_html bnreg amnesiackey.pub > backup.sh.gz cromwell.bin.gz check-portupgrade.pl > why.c teamspeak > [ch...@amnesiac]~% ls -F > amnesiackey.pub cromwell.bin.gz quantumdot/ > backup.sh.gz cromwell_1024.bin.gz teamspeak/ > bnreg/ mail/ why.c > check-portupgrade.pl public_html/ > [ch...@amnesiac]~% > > for just one example.... > > Chris
and digits add another 10. We're up to 62 single-character options. I'm sure punctuation will be next. dig www.google.com @192.168.0.1 OK, so now where does that leave us? _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
