Chet Ramey wrote:
On 9/27/11 6:41 PM, Roger wrote:
Correct. After reading the entire Bash Manual page, I didn't see much mention
of documentation resources (of ERE) besides maybe something about egrep from
Bash's Manual Page or elsewhere on the web. After extensive research for
2011-10-02, 21:51(-04), Chet Ramey:
On 10/2/11 3:43 PM, Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
[*] actually, bash does some (undocumented) preprocessing on the
regexps, so even the regex(3) reference is misleading here.
Not really. The words are documented to undergo quote removal, so
they undergo quote
Stephane CHAZELAS stephane_chaze...@yahoo.fr writes:
The problem and confusion here comes from the fact that \ is
overloaded and used by two different pieces of software (bash
and the system regex).
That's nothing new. The backslash is widely used as a quote character
in several languages,
2011-10-03, 13:48(+02), Andreas Schwab:
Stephane CHAZELAS stephane_chaze...@yahoo.fr writes:
The problem and confusion here comes from the fact that \ is
overloaded and used by two different pieces of software (bash
and the system regex).
That's nothing new. The backslash is widely used as
On 10/2/11 3:43 PM, Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
[*] actually, bash does some (undocumented) preprocessing on the
regexps, so even the regex(3) reference is misleading here.
Not really. The words are documented to undergo quote removal, so
they undergo quote removal. That turns \1 into 1, for
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:53:20PM -0800, Roger wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 06:20:32AM +, Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
2011-09-29, 13:52(-08), Roger:
[...]
Since you're saying the regex description is found within either regex(3) or
regex(7), couldn't there be a brief note within the Bash
2011-09-29, 13:52(-08), Roger:
[...]
Since you're saying the regex description is found within either regex(3) or
regex(7), couldn't there be a brief note within the Bash Manual Page be
something
to the effect:
[...]
No, it's not.
I suppose bash could say: See your system regex(3)
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 06:20:32AM +, Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
2011-09-29, 13:52(-08), Roger:
[...]
Since you're saying the regex description is found within either regex(3) or
regex(7), couldn't there be a brief note within the Bash Manual Page be
something
to the effect:
[...]
No,
Seems I used 'man regex' as well here. AKA regex(3). But I did
realize this a few weeks ago; the real regex description being 'man 7 regex'.
The Bash Manual Page denotes only regex(3).
Not all the world is Linux. The regex(3) reference is the only one
that is consistent across different
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:43:01PM -0800, Roger wrote:
Seems I used 'man regex' as well here. AKA regex(3). But I did
realize this a few weeks ago; the real regex description being 'man 7 regex'.
The Bash Manual Page denotes only regex(3).
You're relatively fortunate that it's *that* easy to
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:22 AM, Greg Wooledge wool...@eeg.ccf.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:43:01PM -0800, Roger wrote:
Seems I used 'man regex' as well here. AKA regex(3). But I did
realize this a few weeks ago; the real regex description being 'man 7 regex'.
The Bash Manual Page
On 9/29/11 9:48 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
Therefore, either bash manpage should specify clearly which regex
manpage it should be in each system (which a bad choice, because there
can be a large number of systems), or the bash manpage should omit all
the non consistent reference and say something
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chet Ramey chet.ra...@case.edu wrote:
On 9/29/11 9:48 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
Therefore, either bash manpage should specify clearly which regex
manpage it should be in each system (which a bad choice, because there
can be a large number of systems), or the bash
On 9/29/11 11:59 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chet Ramey chet.ra...@case.edu wrote:
On 9/29/11 9:48 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
Therefore, either bash manpage should specify clearly which regex
manpage it should be in each system (which a bad choice, because there
can be a
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:59:19AM -0500, Peng Yu wrote:
We all have discovered that regex(3) is not consistent across all the
platform. Why you say it is portable?
The three systems I mentioned earlier today all have regex(3). Which
system have you found, which doesn't have it?
As I
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Greg Wooledge wool...@eeg.ccf.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:59:19AM -0500, Peng Yu wrote:
We all have discovered that regex(3) is not consistent across all the
platform. Why you say it is portable?
The three systems I mentioned earlier today all have
On 09/29/2011 06:18 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
Also, regex(3) does not mention the difference between $x =~ .txt
and $x=~ .txt. I think that the difference should be addressed
in man bash.
It is in man bash.
RR
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:18:57AM -0500, Peng Yu wrote:
Also, regex(3) does not mention the difference between $x =~ .txt
and $x=~ .txt. I think that the difference should be addressed
in man bash.
It already is.
An additional binary operator, =~, is available, with the
On 9/29/11 12:06 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
As I mentioned previously, the best is to add a few examples in man
bash.
I would not object to that, but I can't speak for Chet.
As I said, I will add examples to the info manual and some more
explanation to the man page. Regular expressions are
On 9/29/11 1:46 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
An additional binary operator, =~, is available, with the same
precedence as == and !=. When it is used, the string to the
right of the operator is considered an extended regular
expression and matched
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:06:08PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 9/29/11 11:59 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chet Ramey chet.ra...@case.edu wrote:
On 9/29/11 9:48 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
Therefore, either bash manpage should specify clearly which regex
manpage it should be in
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 07:06:30PM -0800, Roger wrote:
Some good reading I found is under the Bash Manual Page section Parameter
Expansion.
From here, to learn more about regex/regexpr as the Bash Manual is quite brief
on regex, use the following manual pages:
perlretut - Gives a good
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:15:09AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 07:06:30PM -0800, Roger wrote:
Some good reading I found is under the Bash Manual Page section Parameter
Expansion.
From here, to learn more about regex/regexpr as the Bash Manual is quite
brief
on
On 9/27/11 6:41 PM, Roger wrote:
Correct. After reading the entire Bash Manual page, I didn't see much mention
of documentation resources (of ERE) besides maybe something about egrep from
Bash's Manual Page or elsewhere on the web. After extensive research for
regex/regexpr, only found Perl
Hi,
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't match txt. Does anybody know how to match any character
(should be '.' in perl) in
On 9/26/2011 9:19 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
Hi,
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't match txt. Does anybody know how to match any
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Peng Yu pengyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't match txt.
Peng Yu wrote:
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't match txt. Does anybody know how to match any character
(should be '.'
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:49 PM, John Reiser jrei...@bitwagon.com wrote:
Peng Yu wrote:
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 08:19:27PM -0500, Peng Yu wrote:
Hi,
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single character). For example, the following regex
doesn't match txt. Does anybody know
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 09:37:07PM -0500, Dennis Williamson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Peng Yu pengyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I know that I should use =~ to match regex (bash version 4).
However, the man page is not very clear. I don't find how to match
(matching any single
31 matches
Mail list logo
