3 ms·
What he was getting at with that is the conflation of moving and renaming files. He would want "mv" to take 2 params: (1) old file path (e.g., "/users/dev/foo.
by i_s 14y ago
What he was getting at with that is the conflation of moving and renaming files.
He would want "mv" to take 2 params: (1) old file path (e.g., "/users/dev/foo.clj", and (2) new directory (e.g., "/users/lib").
- dogweather 14y agoFor me personally, mv doesn't actually bother me. But yes, for this discussion, a higher level version would probably split it into two commands: rename and move. And these would only do those particular functions. With that there is no implementation leakage. For the few times that you'd want to move and rename, you'd need to use both commands.