Phillip Susi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> Ultimately, neither POSIX nor any other official standard defines what >> is "right" for coreutils. POSIX usually serves as a fine reference, but >> I don't follow it blindly. In rare cases I've had a well-considered >> disagreement with some aspect of a standard, and I have implemented >> default behavior that technically makes an application non-conforming. >> The standard evolves, too. > > Going against the standard behavior is not strictly anathema, true, > but you had better have a good reason for it. This 'fix' gains > NOTHING since any application ( whether it exists now or conceivably > could in the future ) that depends on your preferred behavior is > already inherently broken. With nothing to gain, and both conformance > and performance to loose, this fix seems to be bad form.
The change I expect to implement does not going against POSIX. On the contrary, the standard actually says the current readdir behavior is buggy. See my previous reference to a quote from readdir's rationale. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
