On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:14 AM, ridiculous_fish <[email protected]> wrote: > > On May 30, 2012, at 1:17 PM, Maxim Gonchar wrote: > [...] > 4. I think fish is doing the right thing with "false ; and sdlkfjsdklf". > That semicolon means that the 'and' is the beginning of a new statement, and > fish agrees with other shells (including fish trunk) that this is an error. > Remove the semicolon ("false and sdlkfjdsklf") and it does not error. > > This statement confronts all my fish experience. I use fish as default shell > for the long time. > What about "echo 123 and echo 234" and "echo 123; and echo 234"?
If I might add to that: having 'and', 'or' and 'not' as separate commands seems conceptually simpler to me. Also, it is more useful for interactive use, because you can start executing a command like 'foo' and then add 'and bar'. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
