• Björn TantauOPA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    When you want to find something in a different path than your current one you have to supply it as the first argument. When you try to do find -name foo.bar /path it will complain that the path should be the first argument. So it knows what you’re trying to do and instead of doing it it just complaints.

    • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 months ago

      Back in the day, find required that you added “-print” to actually print out the results in the terminal. That was bad UX, and now -print is the default. But… following some syntax like supplying path as first argument for find is necessary to not create ambiguity in some cases, and enforcing it makes it more readable imho.

    • aard@kyu.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s already the friendly variant. Traditional find has a mandatory path as first argument, so to find in the current directory you need to do find .

      It also doesn’t know if it really is a path - it just prints that as a likely error. You might just have messed up quoting an argument.

    • Hjalmar@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Nice, UX is clearly a top priority (;

      I’ll have to try and see if FD does the same bullshit though

      • trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I dont think it does. The thing that annoys me about fd is that it uses regex as a default for patterns while I’m used to having glob as default everywhere else.

        • takeheart@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          I mean you could alias the glob option as the default but I clearly see your point about standardized default behaviour.