David Laight wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:05:12PM +0100, Christian Biere wrote:
> >  
> > > I have a preference for not adding such non-standard extensions in
> > > a shell, because their mere existence encourages people to write
> > > nonportable scripts.
> 
> I agree, especially in places where there is already standard syntax
> that easily achieves the same result.
>  
> > You have a point there but I find this feature only relevant for interactive
> > use. I don't think I ever used in scripts.
> The problem is that someone else will....
> 
> > The same could be said, for example,
> > about GCC extensions. They can be used to improve things but they can very well
> > be used to achieve the opposite. I don't see why the penalty should go to wrong
> > people though. I thought we sell rope?
> 
> And many of those are a complete portability nightmare...

Alright, I keep the changes private then and I don't have the desire to maintain
a fork either. EOT.

-- 
Christian