Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:55:10 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > Probably fixed in modern shells. How long have you been shell scripting? (I > also consider it a bug; the incantation is a workaround.) I first landed in *nix land with Fedora Core 5 (2005 or 2006, I forget which), was doing shell

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:49:05AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 06Apr2016 19:33, derek martin wrote: > >Then again, maybe I did know that once--my > >memory chips have become increasingly faulty with age. ;-) > > Me too. I am further hampered by little "calendar"

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

* On 06 Apr 2016, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 06Apr2016 19:52, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:38:43 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > > For historic reasons, "$@" evaluates to a single "" if there were no > > > arguments > > > at all, introducing a

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: [...] Hi all > Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my > folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there - where is it? Me too and while it does find the message it does not tell me /where/ it is. How do you do

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Mi, 06 Apr 2016, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:38:43 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > For historic reasons, "$@" evaluates to a single "" if there were no > > arguments at all, introducing a spurious new empty argument. > > Possibly the thinking was that something like "$@"

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

* On 07 Apr 2016, Christian Brabandt wrote: > > According to Sven Maschecks website > http://www.in-ulm.de/~mascheck/various/bourne_args/ > > , > | These shells behave the old way and need ${1+"$@"}: > | > | Certainly: /bin/sh on 7th edition (aka Version 7). And thus also /bin/sh on >

Re: portable shell scripts (was: How do you survive without notmuch?)

What fun! * On 07 Apr 2016, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > Ah. I like zsh for my interactive shell. But we always leave root's shell > alone. However, I am a _very_ strong advocate for writing scripts for > /bin/sh, and avoiding bashisms for exactly your reasons above. Am I alone in > wincing

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 08:56:33AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 07Apr2016 19:53, Andreas wrote: > >Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: > >>Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my > >>folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 08:10:13PM -0400, Fred Smith wrote: > > well, to answer the OP, I've never before heard of notmuch, so I've > never missed it! At least notmuch w

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 10:50:13PM +0200, bastian-muttu...@t6l.de wrote: > On 07Apr16 19:53 +0200, Andreas wrote: > > Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: > ... > By now I cannot imagine any solution which is more flexible (for me). > Comments welcome! I do basically the same, with some

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On 07Apr16 19:53 +0200, Andreas wrote: > Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: > > Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my > > folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there - where is it? Here, just a quick glimpse into my experience. I discovered an

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 10:50:13PM +0200, bastian-muttu...@t6l.de wrote: > On 07Apr16 19:53 +0200, Andreas wrote: > > Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: > > > Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my > > > folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there -

portable shell scripts (was: How do you survive without notmuch?)

On 07Apr2016 10:37, derek martin wrote: I've yet to notice any of the so-called benefits of getting older, that people sometimes extoll... My father once asserted that it was better than the alternative. Probably fixed in modern interactive shells. Note your test is

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On 07Apr2016 19:53, Andreas wrote: Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there - where is it? Me too and while it does find the message it does not tell

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

* Cameron Simpson [04-07-16 18:59]: > On 07Apr2016 19:53, Andreas wrote: > >Am 07.04.2016 um 01:19 schrieb Cameron Simpson: > >>Usually when I reach for notmuch it is because I have mismanaged my > >>folders. Hmm, that message about blah isn't there - where is

Re: portable shell scripts (was: How do you survive without notmuch?)

On 07Apr2016 22:27, derek martin wrote: On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 04:23:18PM -0700, David Champion wrote: Speaking of which, it's taken me until the last year to use $(command) consistently instead of `command`, and I'm not sure anymore why I was a stickler. I assume

Re: How do you survive without notmuch?

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 07:52:00PM -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:38:43 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > For historic reasons, "$@" evaluates to a single "" if there were no > > arguments > > at all, introducing a spurious new empty argument. Possibly the thinking > >

Re: portable shell scripts (was: How do you survive without notmuch?)

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 08:51:52AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 07Apr2016 10:37, derek martin wrote: > >I've yet to notice any of the so-called benefits of getting older, > >that people sometimes extoll... > > My father once asserted that it was better than the

portable shell scripts (was Re: How do you survive without notmuch?)

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 10:21:24PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: > For several years starting in '83 the group I worked with authored > some of the AT courses on shell programming. This was one defect > that we reported in the Bourne shell, but not the Korn shell courses. So when is the first