Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!hplabs!hao!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.works,net.flame
Subject: Re: grisly grizzled programs (actually: comments on ls bugs)
Message-ID: <3300@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 18-Feb-85 23:44:52 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.3300
Posted: Mon Feb 18 23:44:52 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 20-Feb-85 08:42:52 EST
References: <596@topaz.ARPA> <372@terak.UUCP> <3284@umcp-cs.UUCP> <6322@boring.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 17
Xref: utcs net.works:891 net.flame:8069

[First, side issue: I just checked, and lo and behold, our ``ls'' really
*does* print ``?'' for newlines and tabs embedded in file names.]

However, my point (which wasn't in my original followup, for shame!) is
that I believe it's better to actually *say*

	BUGS
	    This program occasionally does the wrong thing

rather than covering it up, making people find it out for themselves.
I agree that it's better still if the program always does the ``right''
thing, but when it doesn't and there isn't enough incentive to fix it,
it should at least be documented.  This is what the BUGS section is for.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 4251)
UUCP:	{seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@maryland