From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [168.235.81.73])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3DC2929E
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>; Sat,  6 Jul 2024 16:10:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from sirjofri.de ([5.45.105.127]) by 9front; Sat Jul  6 10:09:02 -0400 2024
Received: from dummy.faircode.eu ([95.90.217.91]) by sirjofri.de; Sat Jul  6 16:09:00 +0200 2024
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2024 16:08:59 +0200 (GMT+02:00)
From: sirjofri <sirjofri+ml-9front@sirjofri.de>
To: 9front@9front.org
Message-ID: <c7e0dfee-ed51-4ba3-aa3b-cba2936b70e8@sirjofri.de>
In-Reply-To: <9B97890FFC11EBEF9081B4D16E0DB78D@smtp.pobox.com>
References: <9B97890FFC11EBEF9081B4D16E0DB78D@smtp.pobox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Correlation-ID: <c7e0dfee-ed51-4ba3-aa3b-cba2936b70e8@sirjofri.de>
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: mobile abstract session persistence control 
Subject: Re: [9front] Re: /bin/"" use of rc -c instead of eval
Reply-To: 9front@9front.org
Precedence: bulk

To add on that, I would vote for changing everything to make cd work. It's about consistency.

The question is if it's better to have it in /bin/"" or as /env/fn#"". I think that /bin/"" makes more sense for various reasons.

Also a good question would be: do we create an extra case for cd commands, or do we use eval? An extra case for cd commands would imply that the cd part of custom programs (including shell scripts) wouldn't work, so eval would be the most consistent, as OP suggested. I don't know about the downsides of eval though.

sirjofri