Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: more rm insanity
Message-ID: <6799@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 5-Dec-87 10:41:49 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6799
Posted: Sat Dec  5 10:41:49 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Dec-87 06:04:03 EST
References: <9593@mimsy.UUCP> <1413@bgsuvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) )
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 13

In article <1413@bgsuvax.UUCP> denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) writes:
>and notice that rm has a (null) option, -, that causes it to not treat args
>beginning with a - as a switch, so all you have to do is type:

Great, another violation of the command syntax standard, and one
that is incompatible with previous practice as well.

"-" traditionally has been shorthand for the standard input, as in
	myprog | cat header - trailer | troff | dimp

On sane systems, "--" on practically ANY command marks the end of
the option arguments.  It is much better to have a universal rule
than a special hack in a particular command.