> You seem to have a very narrow definition of "portable." Can you explain how wanting to include more programs into the definition of portable is narrow? > C

> You seem to have a very narrow definition of "portable." Can you explain how wanting to include more programs into the definition of portable is narrow? > Can you link to the definition of the jargon term you appear to be using here? The same definition I've always seen in every community discussing shell-scripting: if it's specified by the POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) standard. POSIX does have a definition of `echo`. GNU echo does not conform to it by default, but can be configured to. > Also, have you considered that some words have colloquial meanings too, and that it doesn't make sense to label them as "not correct"? But it makes sense to label `echo` itself as not portable? The argument can be made that `GNU echo` is not portable (even though it can be with an environment variable), however that should be specified, instead of mentioning there are several implementations where it is non-standard.