[Gnu-arch-users] Re: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?

[Miles Bader]

Jan Hudec <address@hidden> writes:
> % and @ are ok, as are + and ,. (Some of them are globbing as part of
> other constructs, however).
> 
> > Yes, that question is facetious, but you probably get my point -- zsh
> > has gone nuts with giving special meanings to various characters, and
> > in general, unless you just give up and only use `A-Z and .', you can't
> > really win at this game.
> 
> You can. Both + and , are ok, so arch kind of won it ;-).

I mean you can't win at the not-interfering-with-any-random-program-
that-decided-to-give-funky-interpretations-to-some-characters game.
Sure, the above are OK with zsh -- but whoops, zsh is cranky about =,
vim has a few problems with +, DOS has grabbed %, and ...

The current choices are basically pretty reasonable, I think.
Changing to other characters is just going to annoy people without
really solving `the problem' (such as it is).

For the most part, +/=/{ are not a part of everyday-life-with-arch
except sometimes where someone (note, _not_ tla the program) has chosen
to use = in the name of a source file; those people who are bothered by
the latter use can complain to the package maintainer I suppose.

, is used more often in an `offical role', but is one of the most
innocuous choices, and no one seems to be complaining about it.

-Miles
-- 
97% of everything is grunge