Ksh use (was Re: Should ``csh be part of ...)
Root Boy Jim
rbj at icst-cmr.arpa
Wed May 25 03:24:22 AEST 1988
In article <2199 at quacky.mips.COM> dce at mips.COM (David Elliott) writes:
> Does ksh have anything like {}? (In case you don't know, "-r1.{2,4}"
> expands to "-r1.2 -r1.4".)
NB - this happens regardless of whether any files exist with names like
this. There's lots of ways to generate names of files in sh & csh, but
not enough to just manufacture arbitrary patterns, in my opinion; this
feature bucks that trend.
Bourne shell (and I assume ksh) use {} to denote a list of commands,
similar to a subshell, but executed in the same shell. Thus, I doubt
that the pattern generation will ever be implemented unless they can
find some free meta-characters. A pity, as I am attached to this feature
as well. I do `mv foo.c{,.old}' etc all the time.
>Of course, I'm not completely insane, since I often go into sh to run
>loops, and I write on sh scripts, never csh scripts.
Agreed. Only lunatics *prefer* 'csh' for scripts. I just want a Bourne
shell with shell functions and history. Does that exist? :-)
Disagreed. Unless your script is trivial, you need features that sh
provides, or you want to make your scripts portable, coding in csh
is more intuitive. Sh command syntax is braindamaged.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There was something fishy about the butler. I think he was a Pisces, |
probably working for scale." - Nick Danger |
You want some more cotton candy, Danger?
uunet-----\ |
Robert Thurlow !van-bc!rthurlow |
ubc-cs----/ |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell <rbj at icst-cmr.arpa>
National Bureau of Standards
Flamer's Hotline: (301) 975-5688
The opinions expressed are solely my own
and do not reflect NBS policy or agreement
My name is in /usr/dict/words. Is yours?
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list