From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3/2) with ESMTP id IAA17718 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 08:28:26 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id SAA29813; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 18:22:13 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 18:22:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 96 00:18 MET DST From: hoh@approve.se (Goran Larsson) Subject: Re: -M options To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <7339.199606062151@downwind.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"QbTgQ1.0.iH7.Lerjn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1284 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu ----------ONLY HEADERS ABOVE THIS LINE------------ > I rationalised that -M could refer to coMMands. It would also mean > that the two options meaning the same thing to several builtins would > be -m and -M, which makes it a little easier to remember. Why does it have to be an option to all these commands? Why not a make the command name an argument to another command, i.e. xxxx typeset (where xxxx is a new command) or even better print -L typeset instead of typeset -M -- Goran Larsson Phone: +46 13 299588 FAX: +46 13 299022 Approve AB +46 589 12810 +46 589 16901 hoh@approve.se I was an atheist, until I found out I was God.