"Axel Liljencrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Fish _does_ have a \ parser. \n, \t, \\ and friends all work, as do
>> > \$, \{, \% \(, and other characters used for argument expansion. Fish
>> > even supports \xXX, \oOOO, \uXXXX, etc for arbitrary symbols, e.g.
>> > 'echo \u2026' writes out an unicode ellipsis character to stdout.
>>
>> Ahh, I had tried it with quotes Ie. "a\nb" and even "a\"b" (which is
>> a syntax error) ... and tr does \ processing itself, so I just assumed
>> the rest.
>
> Yes, it may seem a bit counter intuitive to allow \n but not '\n', but
> once you start thinking about it, the role of quotes in shellscript
> languages are to _remove_ various types of argument expansion, not to
> add new ones. And from that perspective, I really think the fish
> syntax makes perfect sense. And it sure beats the braindead $'\n'
> syntax used in other shells.
Yeh, just from seeing C I expect ' " to allow them (and zsh does too).
>> > Actually, though, one of the above _is_ missing, namely \0. Fish
>> > internally uses null-terminated strings, it would take a bit of work
>> > to handle \0 correctly, though I suppose that this should be done.
>>
>> http://www.and.org/vstr/security ;)
>
> You wrote that? Very nice page. In my defense I will say these things:
I did, hence the wink :).
> * When I started writing fish, I couldn't find any good dynamic string
> library using wchar_t. This is also why fish uses it's own internal
> tokenizer instead of something like flex.
Yeh, the general solution I've seen/used seems to be to avoid wchar_t
and just declare char to be utf-8 ... but that's coming from someone
who only speaks English, so...
>> Also note that \000 is just the normal octal encoding though,
>> Ie. from the tr man page:
>>
>> \NNN character with octal value NNN (1 to 3 octal digits)
>
> I had no idea. Though I must say that 'normal' depends on where you
> are coming from. tr (and probably many other commands/languages) use
> \NNN, while Python, C and a host of other computer languages use
> \oOOO.
That's not true (for C at least). See ISO 9899:1999 (C99) 6.4.4.4
... it has \N \NN and \NNN for how to escape octal values. The only
matches for \o in the text are for references to \octal digits, which
reference 6.4.4.4.
I don't have a copy of c89 handy, but I'd put money on \oNNN not
being std.
I'd never seen the \oNNN syntax before you mentioned it, but I don't
see any harm in keeping it.
> I'm curious to how others see the the interaction between ';' and '|',
> if anyone can explan to me their view on how they should be
> interpreted, I'm all ears.
My viewpoint is more of a syntax/protocol one, so I read "echo a;;"
as "echo a" <END command> "" <END command> ... where the null
statement is not the ; itself, but the lack of anything before it. So
I see "foo|;" as "foo" <Wait for input next command> "" <END command>
and the "" wouldn't qualify as an input command.
But, maybe I've written too many network protocol apps. :)
--
James Antill -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.and.org/and-httpd
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Fish-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
