On 09/08/07, Keith Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 9, 2007, at 9:08 AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Yes, but throwing up our hands and saying "oh well, people will always
> > do things they shouldn't too bad" sounds rather defeatist.
> >
> > I simply can't accept that the solution to something we know is wrong,
> > is to perpetuate that wrong.
> >
> > Notice I never said you had to penalize the user.
> >
> > However, perpetuating something that is wrong is only going to make
> > things worse. So, when will someone have the courage to stand up and
> > do something about it?
>
> *sigh* this isn't  question of courage. it's a question of futility.
>
> If you want to help people write better shell scripts (e.g. more
> standard compliant) join the bash project and provide them with built
> in lint facilities. Or write a shell lint and evangelize it's usage.
>
> Failing to accommodate reality isn't courage, it's denial.

How is printing a warning indicating that a script should specify its
actual shell instead of assuming the shell bash "denial"?

How is that anymore denial than the whole issue of seg faulting when a
developer tries to print NULL instead of printing "(null")?

How is that anymore denial than an operating system seg faulting a
program when a developer tries to let their program write to a memory
location that is out of bounds?

I could go on, but the point is that operating systems are *filled*
with checks and bounds that all ultimately penalise a user in some
way.

You seem to be indicating that many of these things are simply denial
implicitly, but since I don't believe you are doing that, I'll let you
explain why some warnings, errors, and checks are ok but not others
such as the one I am suggesting.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. " --Donald Knuth
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss

Reply via email to