On 12/6/06, Uwe Dippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:40:15 -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
...
https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mail.tpl?CALLER=show_archive.tpl&source=L&listname=austin-group-l&id=9010
Oh, thanks for an enlightening read, really.
And what is the second last sentence in his message ?
> As a result, the only way to get a usable test was to just use the
> number of arguments as a guide. This way would allow most of existing
> scripts to be portable,
Does it ? No, not.
Nice quote out of context there. I especially like how you cut off
the end of his sentence, where he made clear how the non-portable
usage of -o, -a, and parens can be made portable *and* robust.
Or do you disagree with his judgement that
1) the addition of -o and -a had damaged scripts that didn't use them,
2) -o and -a were not implemented consistently at the time POSIX was
written, and
3) scripts should use one of the robust, consistent, and portable alternatives?
If so, well, I hope you enjoy that universe you live in.
Philip Guenther
