On Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Linda Walsh wrote:
But then we've devolved to really ugly.
I like the look of
(a b c) = (1 2 3).
At least the "<<<" allows it to be on one line though not so attractively,
but using the multiline redirection just gets too unslightly for words.
A minor loss of "prettin
Linda Walsh wrote:
On 8/2/2010 1:13 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
There are several versions of `autoload' in examples/functions.
Chet
===
I've been using 'man bash' as my reference. I don't see a reference
to examples or autoload, and finding 'functions' doesn't show me any examples.
Is the
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 01:20:58PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> On 8/2/2010 1:13 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> > There are several versions of `autoload' in examples/functions.
> >
> I've been using 'man bash' as my reference. I don't see a reference
> to examples or autoload, and finding 'functio
On 8/2/2010 1:13 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> There are several versions of `autoload' in examples/functions.
>
> Chet
===
I've been using 'man bash' as my reference. I don't see a reference
to examples or autoload, and finding 'functions' doesn't show me any examples.
Is there another manpa
On 8/1/10 9:10 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
>
>
> I had(have) several functions that I don't use on a regular basis (rarely),
> that
> I had put into a subdir "func_lib" under my local-definitions directory.
> This came from ksh, which allows you to define functions with an "undef"
> attribute,
>
On 8/1/10 7:05 PM, Dennis Williamson wrote:
> If I do the echo line twice, I get a segfault in both Bash
> 4.0.33(1)-release and 4.1.0(1)-release.
Thanks. This will be fixed in bash-4.2.
> And you're right about being evaluated twice.
This was already changed after bash-4.1 was released; the ch
On 7/29/10 4:55 PM, Bernd Eggink wrote:
> It seems that indirect expansion doesn't work with arrays:
>
> $ a=(x y z)
> $ b=a
> $ echo "${!b[0]} ${!b[1]} ${!b[2]}"
> x
>
> Is that intended? The documentation isn't explicit about it.
It does, but it doesn't work in the way you are trying. The `!'
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 09:11:23PM +0200, Bernd Eggink wrote:
> Ksh and zsh also have the 'function'
> keyword, probably other shells as well. I prefer it in ksh because it
> makes locally declared variables really local, while with the name()
> syntax they are shared with the environment.
What
Am 02.08.2010 20:16, schrieb Eric Blake:
On 08/02/2010 12:15 PM, Bernd Eggink wrote:
Am 02.08.2010 19:15, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
Bernd Eggink writes:
eval "function $name
Don't use function, use "$name ()" instead.
What's wrong with function??
'function name' is a bash exte
On 08/02/2010 12:15 PM, Bernd Eggink wrote:
> Am 02.08.2010 19:15, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
>> Bernd Eggink writes:
>>
>>> eval "function $name
>>
>> Don't use function, use "$name ()" instead.
>
> What's wrong with function??
'function name' is a bash extension while 'name()' is POSIX.
Am 02.08.2010 19:15, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
Bernd Eggink writes:
eval "function $name
Don't use function, use "$name ()" instead.
What's wrong with function??
Bernd
--
Bernd Eggink
http://sudrala.de
Bernd Eggink writes:
> eval "function $name
Don't use function, use "$name ()" instead.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
Am 02.08.2010 03:10, schrieb Linda Walsh:
I had(have) several functions that I don't use on a regular basis (rarely), that
I had put into a subdir "func_lib" under my local-definitions directory.
This came from ksh, which allows you to define functions with an "undef"
attribute,
and at runtim
On Sun, Aug 01, 2010 at 06:10:31PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> I had(have) several functions that I don't use on a regular basis (rarely),
> that
> I had put into a subdir "func_lib" under my local-definitions directory.
> This came from ksh, which allows you to define functions with an "undef"
>
It's called a "here string".
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
> Huh. Triple redirect... Thanks!
>
>
> On 7/26/2010 5:53 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 7/26/10 6:25 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>>> I don't know if there's an easy way, but if not would you consider an
>>> RFE --
>>>
>>>
15 matches
Mail list logo
