On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Frank Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 01:44:26 -0500 (EST)
> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > i understand that that's not indicated on the man page. on the
> > other hand, is there any reason that it *wasn't* done that way?
> > it would seem that that would be an obvious enhancement and,
> > certainly, that would be more intuitive behaviour, no?
>
> It would be fairly trivial to "roll your own" if you require that
> functionality.
yes, i realize that -- i'm just baffled why that wasn't the obvious
behaviour in the first place. i mean, i'm trying to imagine the
brainstorming session:
A: "and if the user asks for fields 1 and 2, we'll print 1 and 2."
B: "yup, i'm all over that."
A: "and if he asks for 2 and 1 ... i know, we'll still print 1, then
2. hahahaha! oh, man, sometimes i crack me up!"
i'm just curious what kind of thinking went into doing something so
non-intuitive. after all, if you ask "awk" to print given fields, it
does what you expect. i just can't imagine what sort of thinking went
into cut's behaviour, when doing it "right" the first time seems like
it would have been a no-brainer.
anyway, i know there's always awk when i want something done
correctly.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
