On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 11:21:29AM +0300, Beni Cherniavsky wrote: > > I think the history is conceptually a builtin, because you can't set > > it (and should not be able to). > Why shouldn't I set it?
yes, i also would like to be able to add commands to the history with out executing them. often i am working on a command, then i realize i need to do something else first. at that point it would be nice to add the command to the history to serve as memory and be able to come back to it later. i also want to be able to execute some commands without having them added to the history. the history ought to be a pool of resources available to you, and not a log of what happened. (ok, maybe history is not a good name for it then, but if it's a log it certainly doesn't need to be kept in memory) > Granted. Though I'm slightly afraid the performance of > ``(history)[n]`` will deteriorate as the history grows. well, if history is a builtin it would not make a big difference, or maybe no difference at all depending on the implementation. > I think I'll write a bash->fish migration tutorial soon. put it on the new wiki. i also have some input for that. greetings, martin. -- cooperative communication with sTeam - caudium, pike, roxen and unix offering: programming, training and administration - anywhere in the world -- pike programmer travelling and working in europe open-steam.org unix system- bahai.or.at iaeste.(tuwien.ac|or).at administrator (caudium|gotpike).org is.schon.org Martin Bähr http://www.iaeste.or.at/~mbaehr/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
