Re: [dev] [ls] reform ls

From: Connor Lane Smith <>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 15:47:51 +0100

On 19 April 2015 at 12:41, FRIGN <> wrote:
> > enum { AlphaSort, SizeSort = 'S', TimeSort = 't' },
> Rather use an "int sorttype = 'a';" and change it while parsing the flags.

So exactly what I said except using an int instead of an enum? That's
fine too, although the compiler won't then be aware of the set of
known values during a switch statement.

On 19 April 2015 at 13:16, Quentin Rameau <> wrote:
> As for how r-flag is presently implemented it remains necessary to check,
> but it would be indeed better to put r-flag into entcmp.

To be honest, the behaviour (and name) of -f implies that it should
print out filenames as it goes rather than waiting until it has
reached the end of the directory before printing the lot, thus both
being faster and using less memory. That's why -r is to be ignored,
and -lgnos may be ignored: because they are all problematic for that
behaviour (e.g. because they require that the directory be preceded by
a total block count). Still, POSIX doesn't seem to particularly care
for it anyway. It just seems like a useless option if you don't take
advantage of the obvious optimisation.

Received on Sun Apr 19 2015 - 16:47:51 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Apr 19 2015 - 17:00:10 CEST