On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer <taylanbayi...@gmail.com> wrote: > "Thompson, David" <dthomps...@worcester.edu> writes: > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: >> >>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility. Probably it should >>> do an implicit ‘sh -c’? >> >> This introduces implementation issues. What if a user provides both a >> -E command *and* a command after '--'? What's the sane thing to do? >> >> I also don't feel strongly that we need to keep flags around for >> compatibility this early in the game, given that we are alpha software >> and such. >> >> Thoughts? > > I thought it would be nice to keep also for convenience... > > -E 'foo' is somewhat nicer than -- sh -c 'foo'.
But this is not a very common case (citing my own personal experience and sudo, ssh, and other programs that use this pattern), and now we have to deal with precedence rules in the argument parser. If we have to keep -E, then I would rather not implement the '--' stuff. - Dave
