On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 10:16:26AM -0600, Gabriel Gunderson wrote: > On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 09:58 -0600, Charles Curley wrote: > > > Why? > > > > Because
> > * Back ticks are deprecated, and in future may be used for something > > else. > I've never heard of this. Interesting. > I'd be interested in reading about the back tick being deprecated. > Any links? I'll just google if not. I thought I had read that in Newham and Rosenblatt, Learning the Bash Shell, O'Reilly,2nd. ed., but on a quick search I don't see it. They do refer to it as "archaic" (Table 1-6). In a footnote on page 103 they say it is there for backward compatibility. The man page is silent on deprecation. So I could be wrong on that. -- Charles Curley /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign Looking for fine software \ / Respect for open standards and/or writing? X No HTML/RTF in email http://www.charlescurley.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0 809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB
pgpHixsyoZX2H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
