Hey folks.
A while ago we had this discussion about pattern matching notation and
characters vs. bytes.
Back then, Harald von Dijk did some investigation on whether the
standard could be changed to allow for bytes (and not just characters)
without breaking all kinds of shells.
IIRC, when he
Date:Mon, 31 Oct 2022 19:03:53 +
From:"Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group"
Message-ID: <20221031190353.ar33l2s6dwkor...@chazelas.org>
| [ is perfectly fine after we deprecate -a, -o binary operators
| and "(", ")".
Which was done ages
Date:Mon, 31 Oct 2022 16:39:06 +
From:Austin Group Bug Tracker
Message-ID:
| This is already being fixed by bug
| https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1254,
OK, thanks, that is fine. If I trusted my ability to conduct a
search in mantis, I might
2022-10-31 12:00:24 -0700, Scott Lurndal via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> However, another benefit of the '[[' builtin is that it does not
> do word splitting or pattern expansion.
[...]
"[" doesn't do word splitting of pathname expansion either, it's
the shell that does if you
2022-10-31 10:35:38 -0700, Scott Lurndal via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> Historically, '[[' was implemented directly by the shell, while '['
> was implemented using fork(), exec("[").There is clearly a benefit
> to eliminating process creation.
[...]
AFAIK and as also suggested
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 11:24:06AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
> scott wrote:
> >Historically, '[[' was implemented directly by the shell, while '['
> >was implemented using fork(), exec("[").There is clearly a benefit
> >to eliminating process creation.
>
> Isn't that an implementation
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 11:24:06AM -0700, Roger Marquis via austin-group-l at
The Open Group (austin-group-l@opengroup.org) wrote:
> Korn shell does predate Perl by 4 years (according to
> Wikipedia). Was the operator in question part of the initial
> implementation though (David)?
The [[ ...
scott wrote:
Historically, '[[' was implemented directly by the shell, while '['
was implemented using fork(), exec("[").There is clearly a benefit
to eliminating process creation.
Isn't that an implementation detail that can be easily changed? If so
not sure it'd be relevant to the
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 02:06:48PM -0700, Roger Marquis via austin-group-l at
The Open Group wrote:
> >Now i read stephane's "MO, [[...]] has no benefit other than cosmetic over
> >[" (#5973)
>
> No benefit is key, but the cost is also an issue, cost in terms of
> compatibility.
Historically,
The issue 0001611 has been set as DUPLICATE OF the following issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1254
==
Reported By:stephane
The following issue has been set as DUPLICATE OF issue 0001254.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1611
==
Reported By:kre
Assigned
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1611
==
Reported By:kre
Assigned To:
The following issue has been RESOLVED.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1560
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
The following issue has been RESOLVED.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1561
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
The following issue has been RESOLVED.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1564
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
The following issue has been CLOSED.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1585
==
Reported By:steffen
Assigned To:
The following issue has been CLOSED.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1591
==
Reported By:eggert
Assigned To:
17 matches
Mail list logo
