bug#46060: Offer ls --limit=...

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I hereby propose "ls --limit=..."

$ ls --limit=1 # Would only print one result item:
A

You might say:
"Jacobson, just use "ls|sed q". Closed: Worksforme."

Ah, but I am talking about items, not lines:

$ ls
A  B  C  D
E  F  G  H
I  J  K  L
$ ls -C|sed 2q
A  B  C  D
E  F  G  H
$ ls -C --limit=2
A        B
$ ls    --limit=2
A        B

Indeed, directories might be huge. And any database command already has
a --limit option these days, and does not rely on a second program to
trim its output because it can't control itself. Indeed, on some remote
connections one would only want to launch one program, not two. Thanks.