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/'
