Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!mit-eddie!bbn.com!pdsmith
From: pdsmith@bbn.com (Peter D. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: shell architecture (to glob or not to glob)
Message-ID: <62271@bbn.BBN.COM>
Date: 23 Jan 91 22:47:28 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.013815.11419@ims.alaska.edu> <11314@lanl.gov> <5340@idunno.Princeton.EDU> <1991Jan14.170115.17178@Think.COM> <360@bria> <1991Jan17.185527.9824@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <365@bria> <1991Jan21.200544.29795@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@bbn.com
Reply-To: pdsmith@spca.bbn.com (Peter D. Smith)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 16

In article <1991Jan21.200544.29795@Neon.Stanford.EDU> andy@Theory.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>The point is that the shell CAN'T do anything useful with arguments
>that aren't filenames.  [...] In any event, the shell can't help a user
>know what kind of arguments are expected or what will be done with them.
>
>-andy
>--

VMS, the 'shell' of overwhelming choice on DEC platforms :-), can already
do this.  It's just a question of time before everyone and their kid
Standards Organization writes any number of incompatible versions for Unix.
No smileys here, I'm afraid.

					Peter D. Smith

PS - it's also intelligent-user-extensible.