[rcr]

But you're also arguing in bad faith. Your go code is shorter, okay, but it doesn't do the same thing as the GNU yes code, so what point are you trying to make? I can also link to philosophy 101 wikipedia articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[38]

I think I have made it pretty clear already, but here it is again:

the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code. yes its not as fast, and yes the executable is larger, but for many, thats a good tradeoff for the extra standard library features, and the reduced LOC/code complexity. sadly as of yet, I haven't seen any cogent technical arguments against my points thus far.

[rascul]

> the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code.

Your code does not have more functionality than GNU's yes as written. It's less code you have to write because of the flag parsing code that has already been written, and it's incompatible with GNU's yes because yours requires -m to change the message.

[rcr]

For an extremely simple utility like the 'yes' command that is compiled and distributed as a binary to trillions of installations what metric do you consider more important, size and speed? Or lines of code in the source? Think about this in engineering terms, everything is a tradeoff and it's your job to come up with the best solution.

I'm genuinely curious to hear your argument.

[rcr]

Also, take a look at openbsd's version of yes

https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/usr.bin/yes/yes.c