Subject: Re: csh pushd
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jan Schaumann <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/19/2004 08:24:37
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Christos Zoulas <email@example.com> wrote:
> In article <20040417170638.GB13247@netmeister.org>,
> Jan Schaumann <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >Secondly, if n is 0, csh treats it as a director name. Even though
> >'pushd +0' is a no-op, I believe it should not try to interpret '+0' as
> >a directory. Especially, since directories named '+n' (for n !=3D 0) ne=
> >to be escaped if they are to be used as names rather than number. (Ie
> >to push the directory named '+1' on the stack, you'd have to do 'pushd
> >\+1' - the same should hold for '+0')
> >Am I correct with this?
> Yes, but historically this is how csh has behaved. I.e. +0 was interpreted
> as a directory. I don't think it matters.
Question is, do we want to retain this behaviour for historic reasons or
rather do the (albeit not really helpful) right thing, then?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----