Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote: |Steffen Daode Nurpmeso dixit: | |>I'm fine with using printf(1), which is the one that works the |>expected -- but for this one mksh.1 (but this is R45) says that | |> have added this as builtin as a speed hack. Do not use in new |> code. | |Yes, it turns out printf(1) is massively less portable: |its amount of functionality differs greatly, and it’s |not even available on all OSes that were current in the |mid-2000s decade.
You know, we turn in circles here. But, according to the famous (to me) [1], mksh-R28/R39 did support \c, which made me thought it's also working like \c is supposed to work. |If you are allowed to limit script execution to Korn Shell |(this includes ksh88, ksh93 and dtksh, pdksh, mksh, MKS ksh) |use print (whose -n option prevents newline printing, and |whose -r option prevents backslash interpretation) with |a -- as argument separator. It's all private around here, so no problem. I'm using echo(1) if there's nothing special and printf(1) if there is (because in the end it is not always a builtin, portably); actually i don't care for those environments which cannot deal with that, i don't have any such in use (even if, now it's all private). |Really. Better not the print one. [1] http://www.in-ulm.de/~mascheck/various/echo+printf/ --steffen
