From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 15003 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2020 23:04:29 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (minnie.tuhs.org: domain of minnie.tuhs.org designates 45.79.103.53 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=45.79.103.53 envelope-from= Received: from unknown (HELO minnie.tuhs.org) (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTP; 10 Mar 2020 23:04:29 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 96CF69BB88; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:04:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 816429BB47; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:03:57 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="FP3pIyj8"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A2FCC9BB47; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:03:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-il1-f175.google.com (mail-il1-f175.google.com [209.85.166.175]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A4E49BB46 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:03:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-il1-f175.google.com with SMTP id k29so240543ilg.0 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:03:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eIuTiodvsXqK+xKCv4wqYQvZyXZa/zozHebam+g2f88=; b=FP3pIyj8wz8pgssM6g81xX/lG4/Ix55j5gASwTAsrLke+3HnQ6XKo3BMuR/NLd00pH 7a2WoZ9Wdq1w5/8ETUBXEreco4gL0VapfzGCPHye1cUuHIRgF393sbLStIcX9+TWJre9 XnxGdK7tJhSYUm/XqqDvCqk2dR1l3QftrLG19SMb6NymIWar3I5N7seOfkmP5Gr2zJcr EBLkglVYWIJdTDh6LEJDG0Sf2GNoniejKTdpnm61VGb66FPBZp8CLrEO86oXHPHwK+yQ ewhkrYa9PquN+UlZOsTsBcVXt3bWKhVl3qYpyRfPUHeRH2xqOQ30Xyms0s5AnC+Xw0m4 BsUg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eIuTiodvsXqK+xKCv4wqYQvZyXZa/zozHebam+g2f88=; b=hJySsY+xDQQ3ux/wQmxe040biB4sHsblTthBZIuZcUh7Rsd5gpsPrN7EqozRi6FtuZ bOKMCXoV2TzxG4njluF5qZbExmNUIc+UsqDByIOztCbzHEN75EcxTGNA9jOFQg1NEysD RePkVcF+NEPKN1fBwV1G4qpTFrGp8yB5UF8tV1PgDWP3BAsd1fm01OOQpuyH6dfyLF5X u33vNyb4YFD2lF/I7nvYtdzTX/7SnV7AktrMurlXQ50JpBp+KM4GDlgXXXC4Lmp+yBZm 8ET4hrAg2NyV/ttdDJftfYOCoikQbrL3JcsE49ejXhnWwTo3/jzJghFK9/LaecSgIac3 43gw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ23ygRoHHcOmtkY3RfBBBErW9kXEseM9csXQSTI6HFftsaZCG3C i8ytd99mKSVUfp0+wYiVy74zYlH96ERbv8VMujQsxQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vu8r9qD4uG3qgKnXUEDW8I6LRlxptxAtmomCjKbWXCh7BdPDlI7uSCKC5pqUv5SR9hzPD+hJrkk1GhXnUnCGXc= X-Received: by 2002:a92:da4a:: with SMTP id p10mr354259ilq.5.1583881433604; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:03:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202003031815.023IFSlD493028@darkstar.fourwinds.com> In-Reply-To: <202003031815.023IFSlD493028@darkstar.fourwinds.com> From: Dan Stromberg Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:03:42 -0700 Message-ID: To: Jon Steinhart Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000037680805a0882222" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Command line options and complexity X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000037680805a0882222 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" When I took a comparative languages class in school, the teacher said that the complexity of a programming language varies with the square of its number of features. I wonder if it's similar for command line options in shell-callables? On the other hand, adding command line options was (at least at one time) seen as a way of distinguishing GNU tools from Unix tools - that is, they were seen as a way of avoiding the copyright lawsuits that were snipping at BSD's heels. --00000000000037680805a0882222 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

When I took a comparative langua= ges=C2=A0class in school, the teacher said that the complexity of a program= ming language varies with the=C2=A0square of its number of features.
<= div>
I wonder if it's similar for command line options in= shell-callables?

On the other hand, adding comman= d line options was (at least at one time) seen as a way of distinguishing G= NU tools from Unix tools - that is, they were seen as a way of avoiding the= copyright lawsuits=C2=A0that were snipping at BSD's heels.
<= br>
--00000000000037680805a0882222--