Re: xargs --negate-interactive

[Bernhard Voelker]

On 07/17/2016 08:49 PM, James Youngman wrote:
> I can see your point, but I think it might seem surprising for
> --interactive=no to turn on the interactive behaviour.   Can we refine
> your proposal so it isn't surprising in this way, somehow?

Ah, that was ambigous, too, I must admit.

Maybe one of these?
a) --interactive=default-no        vs.  --interactive=default-yes
b) --interactive=newline-means-no  vs.  --interactive=newline-means-yes
c) --interactive=no-per-default    vs.  --interactive=yes-per-default

a) may be the clearest (and most closest to your initial proposal),
while c) could be abbreviated by the user to "...=n" which is faster
to type.  WDYT?

Have a nice day,
Berny