Uh, yes pg... that's sort of the point. You are, I think, restating the obvious. Essentially, you are saying that ARGV works correctly when used correctly. That's true, of course. It just isn't exactly what this discussion was about.

The original node was proposing a solution to using ARGV with read() and the point is that there is no good solution to that. That's not how ARGV should be used. Instead, it should be used with <> only.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";