🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1992Jul31.173353.8155@apiary.uucp> milanj@sematech.org (Jon Milan) writes:

> >So, folks, what's the verdict?  Output goes to stdout, preferably
> >arranged in lines and fields for easy filtering.  Error messages and
> >diagnostics (abnormal stuff) goes to stderr.  Where should the sugar
> >go?  stdout?  /dev/tty?  /dev/null?  >&3?

> It can go to stdout as long as there's a command line option to shut it off
> for filtering.  Or preferably, an option to turn the "sugar" ON if someone
> wants it.

That is ideal.  However, some programs are almost tolerable, if they have
a single, terse field name that the filter can test for.  If the program
changes, so that output changes, this can be a Good Thing, because the
filter can identify the fields by the field name (presumably on the first
line, else default to some known arrangement).  So, if your filter encounters
some "new" / unexpected field name, it can get curious, or ignore it, or
complain nonstop, or make some effort to be graceful about it.

> What eats me is when there's NO such option (so I have to hack around the noise),
> then a new version of software comes along that breaks code cause the _noise_ changed!
> I, for one, don't care to rewrite code for _that_ reason.

Grrrr!  Bad, bad program!

> Unfortunately, UNIX is too flexible!  It'll let any programmer do just about
> whatever they please!  And it also lets me rewrite stuff if I don't like it!  :-)

Reminds me of a quote:

UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things,
because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
  -- Doug Gwyn

-- 
lrwx------   1 aldavi01 emacsstu       9 Jun  6 12:43 .signature -> /dev/null