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.
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.
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.
What’s up with find? I’ve got so used to
fdthat I don’t understand what this is referring toWhen 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 /pathit 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.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.
Nice, UX is clearly a top priority (;
I’ll have to try and see if FD does the same bullshit though
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.
I mean you could alias the glob option as the default but I clearly see your point about standardized default behaviour.