Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 7 Jun 2009 09:56:45 +0200
From:      Ruben de Groot <mail25@bzerk.org>
To:        Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Date representation as YY/DDD or YYYY/DDD
Message-ID:  <20090607075645.GA22136@ei.bzerk.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906061405130.91225@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
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> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906061148350.90514@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20090606101422.GB10672@ei.bzerk.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906061405130.91225@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 02:05:39PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar typed:
> >rsync isn't bloated and it's well written IMO. It still does only one job, 
> >and
> >it does it well. As you say, most common tasks can still be done with only
> >short options. This would change if some developer decided to add other,
> >unrelated functionality. But that's harder if you want to maintain short 
> >options
> >for the common tasks.
> >Having only long options would place no such restrictions on bloating.
> >
> what program you mean about having only long options?

Wasn't referring to any particular program's. mplayer is an example though.
But that's not my point.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090607075645.GA22136>