Reply to message «Re: sh vs bash syntax coloring», 
sent 18:28:38 01 August 2011, Monday
by Leiking:

> zsh.
?

Original message:
> zsh.
> 
> 2011/8/1  <[email protected]>:
> >> You can put this option somewher in ~/.zshenv. Or, better, use zsh
> >> syntax for it:
> >>     !action=(xpdf -option) ; ... ; $action file
> >>     !action="xpdf -option" ; ... ; ${(z)action} file
> >>     !action="xpdf -option" ; ... ; $=action file
> >> in last case it is just one more character to type, in the first case
> >> you should type exactly the same number of characters, but two of them
> >> are different. These methods are not the same under all circumstances,
> >> but are the same here. I actually hate using bash for scripting: how do
> >> you like using command "${array[@]}"
> >> where in zsh you type just
> >>     command $array
> >> . You have to also turn your mind on remembering that you must use
> >> quotes around any parameter if you want it to come in one piece and
> >> unmodified.
> >> 
> >> I would likely choose zsh, perl, python for scripting but not bash.
> > 
> > Ok thank you. I think this will be sufficient for my need.
> > Actually I didn't say bash was better than zsh, but I learnt sh syntax
> > first (not even bash, so no array at all it seems) and I don't know zsh
> > one. I only write small scripts ;-)
> > But I'm sure you're right.
> > 
> > --
> > You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
> > Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
> > For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to