[baz00]

I can't say I've found anything particularly wrong with it in the last 40 years.

[queuebert]

The only problem I ever have with 'ls' is accidentally listing very large directories, but that is almost always an OS and filesystem issue at the core.

If an ls replacement could somehow handle directories with >10^4 files faster, then I'd switch.

[o11c]

Have you tried:

    alias ls='ls -U'

? I find my ^C usually makes it through if I need it. Sometimes minimizing the terminal or switching desktops also helps.

(it probably helps that I use a filesystem - btrfs - that is fundamentally append-based so gives a meaningful order even with -U)

[queuebert]

I have not -- thanks for the tip. Having to ^C out of an ls is sub-optimal, to say the least.