An odd difference between "cat file" and "cat<file"
Danny
danny at itm.UUCP
Thu Apr 19 00:58:43 AEST 1984
Just to add more fuel to the fire, let me quote from the UNIX*
Programmer's Manual, Volume 2, "An Introduction to the UNIX Shell",
S. R. Bourne, section 3.7 "Command execution":
...In the following *word* is only subject to parameter and command
substitution. No file name generation or blank interpretation takes
place so that, for example,
echo ... > *.c
will write its output into a file whose name is *.c.
My gosh, maybe it isn't the most user-friendly thing around,
or not what some people want (please don't take that as a personal
affront), but at least IT IS DOCUMENTED!!! Why issit that people
no read manuals?
* UNIX is a trademark of Bell Laboratories.
S. R. Bourne is an employee of Bell Laboratories.
D. S. Cox is a figment of the imagination of a rather non-descript
Kowala in the Austrailian out-back.
--
Daniel S. Cox
(akgua!itm!danny)
More information about the Comp.unix
mailing list