[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: touching "-"
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: touching "-" |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:51:47 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) |
Paul Eggert <eggert <at> CS.UCLA.EDU> writes:
> > ls is not one of those commands. So rather than listing
> > stdin or stdout (neither of which makes sense)
>
> Actually, it would make a lot of sense for 'ls' to list stdin, no?
> 'ls' could apply fstat to stdin and show the results.
POSIX says:
"Where a utility described in the Shell and Utilities volume of POSIX.1-2008 as
conforming to these guidelines is required to accept, or not to accept, the
operand ’−’ to mean standard input or output, this usage is explained in the
OPERANDS section. Otherwise, if such a utility uses operands to represent
files, it is implementation-defined whether the operand ’−’ stands for standard
input (or standard output), or for a file named −."
And OPERANDS for ls(1) doesn't mention behavior either way. So I'm in favor of
such a change. But it takes some thought. Would:
ls - < .
behave like 'ls .' or 'ls -d .'?
--
Eric Blake