shwares...@aol.com wrote: > Mine is straightforward, and represents the requirements based on what is > discoverable about a particular > file name once found. If by 'hash code' you mean 'code that does the path > search', then yes, the Bourne shell is doing a variant of the usually > slower 'exec() first and recover' method. If it's searching path when > the shell execs and constructing a table of files with their X bit set in > each directory, indexed by a hash of > the file name, and using those references even if PATH is changed by the > script or user, then I don't see > that as consistent with the text.
You did not write something different than I did this is why I was confused to read that you have been confused. BTW: The Bourne Shell resets all existing hashes in case that PATH is changed. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sf.net/projects/schilytools/files/'