Re: pushd

[Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxx>]

Anthony Heading wrote:
> I'm still puzzled, though, as to why Peter et al want this PUSHD_CYCLE
> option .  The reason it's so easy to implement is that it is, in
> effect, simply aliasing pushd=cd.  Completely altering the de-facto
> standard definition of a shell command is something on balance to be
> avoided.  To repeat my suggestion , why not just make cd +n push the
> current directory?  Then it'll do exactly the same as pushd, while
> being two less chars to type, and not requiring extra emulation
> parameters.

But it isn't equivalent, because cd doesn't push things down on the
stack, just bring them to the top replacing whatever's there, unless
you have autopushd set, which I don't.  I don't want cd to push things
on the stack, that's why we have pushd.  I want cd to change
directories and pushd to push directories.  I don't think that's
unreasonable.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxx>       Tel: +49 33762 77366
WWW:  http://www.ifh.de/~pws/       Fax: +49 33762 77413
Deutches Electronen-Synchrotron --- Institut fuer Hochenergiephysik Zeuthen
DESY-IfH, 15735 Zeuthen, Germany.