Hello,
Is there some guideline how shebang should look? There are commonly used
two versions:
1) #!/usr/bin/env ruby
2) #!/usr/bin/ruby
I like the first version, because it allows more freedom and usage of
'environment-modules' for example. Nevertheless also the second variant
has its
On 17/02/11 11:26 +0100, Michal Fojtik wrote:
On 17/02/11 10:34 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hello,
Is there some guideline how shebang should look? There are commonly used
two versions:
1) #!/usr/bin/env ruby
2) #!/usr/bin/ruby
I like the first version, because it allows more freedom and usage of
Dne 17.2.2011 11:26, Michal Fojtik napsal(a):
On 17/02/11 10:34 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hello,
Is there some guideline how shebang should look? There are commonly used
two versions:
1) #!/usr/bin/env ruby
2) #!/usr/bin/ruby
I like the first version, because it allows more freedom and
On 02/17/11 - 11:26:48AM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
On 17/02/11 10:34 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hello,
Is there some guideline how shebang should look? There are commonly used
two versions:
1) #!/usr/bin/env ruby
2) #!/usr/bin/ruby
I like the first version, because it allows more freedom
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Ohad Levy ohadl...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:54 -0500, Chris Lalancette wrote:
To be honest, typing #!/usr/bin/ruby is hardwired into my brain, but I
do think
that the #!/usr/bin/env ruby is more generic (and portable).
+1
+1
People who use
