Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:49:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Ruben de Groot <mail25@bzerk.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, utisoft@gmail.com Subject: Re: Date representation as YY/DDD or YYYY/DDD Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906061148350.90514@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20090606094648.GA10672@ei.bzerk.org> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906040113270.28607@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <200906050924.23167.kirk@strauser.com> <b79ecaef0906050950m53fda524i5652f57b1ac389ad@mail.gmail.com> <200906051208.43135.kirk@strauser.com> <b79ecaef0906051323s64a89fe2x134290524b633978@mail.gmail.com> <4A29EBB7.9090100@strauser.com> <20090606094648.GA10672@ei.bzerk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0906061148350.90514>