bug#20354: [feature request] ln with command line arguments in reverse order

[Erik Auerswald]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:45:02PM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 17/04/15 12:45, Erik Auerswald wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:12:01PM +0200, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> >> On 04/17/2015 10:39 AM, Ma Jiehong wrote:
> >>> Currently, 'cp', 'mv' and 'ln' share the same basic syntax, that is to 
> >>> say the following:
> >>>
> >>> cp [OPTION]  SOURCE DEST
> >>> mv [OPTION] SOURCE DEST
> >>> ln [OPTIONS] TARGET LINK_NAME
> >>> [...]
> >> output would be the better way.
> > 
> > I'd say that using TARGET instead of SOURCE creates confusion that would be
> > avoided by using SOURCE and DEST as with cp and mv.
> 
> Not really, as one could still consider that
> DEST was the destination of a symlink.
> 
> How I think about it is:
> 
>   cp [OPTION]  EXISTING NEW
>   mv [OPTION]  EXISTING NEW
>   ln [OPTIONS] EXISTING NEW

That's good wording.

Thanks,
Erik