On 12/14/05, Axel Liljencrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Take the command 'foo ..' for example. If you are in the ~/data/link > directory, it might be reasonable to expand '..' to '~/data', to > maintain the link consistency. But what if '..' is not in fact a > directory but a regexp? The fish way is the only way to get a > consistent directory resolution across all commands and situations, > and that is why I chose it.
Please excuse my ignorance, how can '..' be a regexp in this context?? ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv37&alloc_id865&op=click _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
