Re: [dev] coreutils / moreutils - DC a directory counter

From: Calvin Morrison <>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 14:11:29 -0400

On 17 July 2013 13:58, Chris Down <> wrote:
> On 17 July 2013 19:43, Calvin Morrison <> wrote:
>> The name still this has nothing to do with the utility of the
>> statement. Please focus the conversation on that.
> If you are going to release things to mailing lists (especially this
> one), you are going to have to stop acting so personally offended that
> people bring up problems that are outside of the domain you were
> expecting.

>That your program shares the name as a standardised utility
> is a perfectly legitimate concern; acting like a small child when
> people try to help you out is not conducive to good relations with
> others.

Sure, but continuing to beat a dead horse is not conductive to 'good
relations' either.

> This is a mailing list, this isn't a "talk about what I want
> to talk about" list.

You are right, but does that mean this is a 'Chris Down Moderates this
list with an iron fist list', anyone is free to reply to the emails, I
was simply redirecting the discussion after a point had been agreed

> There is very little that irritates me more than people who reject
> feedback after explicitly asking for it.

I actually asked for the feedback, accepted it, and then was ready for more!

>> Could we focus on the merit of the utility?
> I cannot imagine any period in time where this would have been useful
> for me over a simple `set -- * && echo "$#"', but whatever floats your
> boat. Dependencies are much more costly than a small amount of time
> saved (and dirs with >100k files are very niche).

This set command is simple, but still takes a long time, because bash
spends a long time doing the globbing of the *

Received on Wed Jul 17 2013 - 20:11:29 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 20:24:03 CEST