Re: recent -s patch

[John (_You_ hide, they seek.) Mackin <john@vetsci.su.oz.au>]

    From: Scott Schwartz <schwartz@groucho.cs.psu.edu>

    I don't think -s should imply -i, as the patch does.  If I want both
    I can type both.   

    Is -s going to be standard, or will most people decline to apply the
    patch?

Scott and all,

I don't have a lot of time now, and have more mail to write yet, so
please forgive me if I am a little terse.

The point of -s is not `how should it work', but rather `how -must-
it work'.  No one wants to add -s to rc just because they think
it's a good idea.  They want (in some cases, need) to add -s to rc
_in order to be compatible with the de-facto standard for command
line arguments to UNIX shells_.  That's the point.  This is how
the -s argument works in sh and csh, and therefore, if rc is to
have a -s argument at all, this is how it MUST work in rc.

Personally, I have no need for -s and don't care whether it is
in or out: but if it is to be in, I insist that it work just as
it does in other shells.  Equally, rc cannot define new semantics
for -c or -e, etc.  I hope that's clear.

OK,
John.