Re: master 71783e9: Add the string-numeric-lessp function

[Paul Eggert]

Juri Linkov wrote:
> Still this is the weirdest sorting order that I've ever seen
> where single backups come before, but numbered backups after:
>
>    -rw-r--r--  1 158,018  Mar  8 01:04 dired.el~
>    -rw-r--r--  1 158,018  Mar  8 01:05 dired.el
>    -rw-r--r--  1 158,018  Mar  8 01:01 dired.el.~1~
>    -rw-r--r--  1 158,018  Mar  8 01:02 dired.el.~2~
>    -rw-r--r--  1 158,018  Mar  8 01:03 dired.el.~3~

I like it, as it clearly separates the two backup styles in the hopefully rare 
case where people have edited the same file with different backup styles.  (I 
don't use numbered backups so I don't run into the latter sort of names much.)

As it happens, someone complained about this GNU ls behavior many years ago:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2009-02/msg00250.html

with a response essentially the same as mine (great minds think alike ...):

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2009-02/msg00254.html

Presumably the behavior could be changed in GNU 'ls', though this sounds low 
priority.  Anyway, I'd rather have Emacs and 'ls' behave the same by default, 
when sorting by version; that seems like a no-brainer.